Add SECURITY.md with private vulnerability reporting policy

Documents how to report security issues privately (help@firecrawl.dev or GitHub's private advisory flow) and what is in/out of scope, so researchers don't disclose publicly via GitHub issues. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-14 15:00:01 -04:00
1 changed files with 33 additions and 0 deletions
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+# Security Policy
+
+## Reporting a Vulnerability
+
+If you believe you've found a security vulnerability in pdf-inspector, please
+report it privately so we can fix it before public disclosure.
+
+**Preferred:** Email **help@firecrawl.dev** with:
+
+- A description of the issue and its impact
+- Steps to reproduce (a minimal PDF or input that triggers the bug is ideal)
+- The version or commit hash of pdf-inspector you tested against
+
+**Alternative:** Use GitHub's private vulnerability reporting under the
+[Security tab](https://github.com/firecrawl/pdf-inspector/security/advisories/new).
+
+We'll acknowledge your report in a timely manner and keep you updated on
+remediation progress. Please do not open a public GitHub issue for security
+bugs.
+
+## Scope
+
+In scope:
+- Memory-safety issues (panics, OOB reads, UB) reachable from a crafted PDF
+- Denial-of-service vectors (unbounded allocation, infinite loops) on
+  reasonably-sized inputs
+- Bugs in the `pdf2md` / `detect-pdf` binaries or the `pdf-inspector` crate
+  that affect downstream consumers
+
+Out of scope:
+- Bugs in upstream dependencies (`lopdf`, etc.) — please report those upstream
+- Extraction quality issues (wrong text, missing tables) — open a regular
+  GitHub issue instead