Primary reporting path
Email security@nerviq.net with the subject SECURITY.
If the alias is temporarily unavailable, the repository policy currently also lists business@nerviq.net as a fallback.
This draft security page is a public-facing summary of vulnerability reporting, supported versions, and response expectations. The repository-level SECURITY.md remains the more detailed operational source of truth.
Please do not open a public GitHub issue for an unpatched vulnerability. The first step should be a private report.
Email security@nerviq.net with the subject SECURITY.
If the alias is temporarily unavailable, the repository policy currently also lists business@nerviq.net as a fallback.
The public page should stay simple: we will acknowledge credible reports quickly, then the repository policy carries the more detailed severity table.
Initial acknowledgement within 72 hours.
Critical and high-severity issues follow the tighter timelines published in SECURITY.md.
No bug bounty is offered today, but responsible disclosure is welcome and reviewed.
| Severity | Response | Fix target |
|---|---|---|
| Critical | < 24 hours | < 48 hours |
| High | < 48 hours | < 7 days |
| Medium | < 7 days | < 30 days |
| Low | < 14 days | Next release |
The supported-version list below is taken directly from the current CLI repository security policy.
| Version line | Supported |
|---|---|
| 1.28.x | Yes |
| 1.27.x | Yes |
| 1.26.x | Yes |
| 1.25.x | Yes |
| < 1.25 | No |
Only the latest patch release of each supported major.minor line should be treated as eligible for security updates.
This page should describe what exists today, not imply a hosted enterprise control plane that is not yet public.
@nerviq/cli packagenerviq serve binds to localhost onlyThe public page should promise a responsible disclosure path without overselling guarantees that the team has not formally adopted.
There is no formal bug bounty program today.
We still welcome good-faith reports that avoid privacy violations, service disruption, destructive exploitation, or data exfiltration.
A formal safe-harbor clause should still receive legal review before it is treated as authoritative.
The website now publishes a machine-readable security contact file for scanners and researchers.
Published at /.well-known/security.txt.
mailto:security@nerviq.netenhttps://www.nerviq.net/.well-known/security.txt