Add SECURITY.md with a private vulnerability disclosure path - #383
Conversation
Argus reviewAuto-review is off for this repo. Tick the box below to run a review on this PR.
Estimated cost
Tip: you can also comment |
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Adds a
SECURITY.mdtopyqasm, which currently has no documented way to report avulnerability privately. A researcher's only options today are a public issue, which
discloses the problem to everyone at once, or guessing at an email address.
qBraid/qBraidalready carries one; this adapts it forpyqasmand points at thisrepository's own private advisory form.
Two deliberate differences from the qBraid/qBraid version:
has been stale since 0.8. This one states support for the most recent minor release,
so it does not need editing on every release.
pyqasmreaches third-party packages throughoptional extras, and a reporter should know where to send an issue that originates
upstream, and that we still want to hear about it so we can assess exposure through
a path this package creates.
Related: #382.