sandwich-hime/SECURITY.md

<!-- SPDX-License-Identifier: AGPL-3.0-only -->

# Security policy

Sandwich Hime `v1.0.0-beta.1` is supported within a deliberately narrow
scope: learning, classroom projects, evaluation, and compatibility testing.
Security reports are welcome and receive best-effort maintainer assessment and
fixes while Beta 1 is the current prerelease. This is not production support,
an SLA, a fitness guarantee, or a promise that a fix will preserve beta APIs.

The community is invited to help find compatibility gaps, especially on macOS.
That invitation does not outsource security assurance. Maintainers retain
responsibility for vulnerability review, triage, remediation decisions,
advisories, and release decisions.

## Supported versions

| Version | Security status |
| --- | --- |
| `v1.0.0-beta.1` and `sando/v1.0.0-beta.1` | Current evaluation/classroom prerelease once published; best-effort security assessment and fixes; interfaces may change |
| Public `main` | Development source; reports welcome, but no compatibility or production-support promise |
| Older prereleases | Superseded when a newer prerelease or final version is published; reports are still triaged to determine affected versions |

Beta support lasts until it is superseded or explicitly withdrawn in the
supported-version table and release notes. Published tags are immutable. A
security fix is issued as a new version, never by silently replacing a tag.

## Report a vulnerability privately

Email **security@sandwichhime.com**. Please do not put an undisclosed
vulnerability, working exploit, credential, secret, or personal data in a
public issue.

If that new mailbox rejects or bounces a message, retain the report and open a
canonical Gitea issue containing only the fact that the private security contact
failed. Do not include technical details or sensitive data. The maintainer will
publish a corrected private route. Ordinary usage, classroom, and macOS
compatibility reports that do not reveal a vulnerability may use a public issue.

Helpful reports include:

- the affected compiler/runtime version or exact commit;
- the relevant `.sando` source, generated Go, or development configuration;
- a minimal reproducer and the observed security impact;
- operating system, architecture, Go version, and browser when relevant;
- whether the issue is already public or has a disclosure deadline; and
- a safe way to credit the reporter, or a request to remain anonymous.

Minimize sensitive data. The mailbox is the private reporting route, but
ordinary email is not end-to-end encrypted. Do not send production secrets or
unnecessary personal data. An encryption key will be published only after its
ownership, backup, and recovery procedure have been tested.

## What to expect

These are best-effort targets for a founder-maintained project, not an SLA.
They describe maintainer responsibilities; asking the community to test a beta
does not ask reporters to investigate or remediate it:

- acknowledge a report within 7 calendar days;
- provide an initial severity/scope assessment within 14 calendar days when a
  reproducible issue is available; and
- provide an update at least every 30 calendar days while an accepted report
  remains unresolved.

Health, disability, family responsibility, incomplete evidence, or incident
complexity may make those targets impossible. If that happens, the maintainer
will communicate the delay when safely able rather than inventing certainty.

For a reproducible accepted vulnerability, the project aims to retain a private
reproducer where safe, add a regression test where practical, document affected
versions, and agree on a coordinated disclosure plan when appropriate. A fix
may be delivered through a new immutable version, a retraction, an advisory, or
documentation that narrows an incorrect guarantee. Published tags will not be
moved or silently replaced.

## Scope and trust boundary

The most useful reports concern:

- contextual escaping or browser-parser disagreements;
- unsafe URL acceptance or trusted-value boundary confusion;
- parser, generator, path, symlink, ownership, or atomic-write failures;
- generated-code/runtime ABI mismatches;
- deterministic-output or source-provenance failures;
- development proxy exposure, request-origin controls, process cleanup, or
  unintended execution; and
- dependency, release, signing, checksum, or artifact-integrity problems.

Templates and embedded Go are trusted application source. Sandwich Hime is not
a sandbox for an untrusted template author. Handwritten Go implementations of
`sando.Component` and explicit `sando.Trust*` calls are trusted output
capabilities. Application routing, authorization, HTTP headers, database
security, deployment, and production process isolation remain application
responsibilities unless a defect originates in Sandwich Hime itself.

The complete boundary and known non-goals are maintained in
[the threat model](docs/THREAT_MODEL.md). Reproducible assessment results and
open gaps are recorded separately in
[the security evidence ledger](docs/SECURITY_EVIDENCE.md).

## Good-faith research

Good-faith research means making a reasonable effort to:

- test only systems, repositories, and data you own or are authorized to test;
- prefer local reproductions and the smallest proof necessary;
- stop if testing risks availability, privacy, data integrity, or another
  person's account;
- avoid persistence, destructive changes, social engineering, spam, denial of
  service, credential collection, and unnecessary data access;
- retain and transmit the minimum sensitive information required; and
- allow reasonable time for investigation before public disclosure.

This policy permits research on local copies of the source. It does not
authorize active testing of project-operated websites, Gitea infrastructure,
or third-party deployments without separate written permission. Passively
observed issues are welcome. It does not create a bug bounty, safe-harbor
contract, embargo obligation, or promise that every report can be accepted.
The project will not pursue action against research that the maintainer
reasonably believes followed this policy in good faith, but cannot bind third
parties or override applicable law. When uncertain, contact the security
mailbox before testing.

## Current assurance level

The code has maintainer-led threat modeling, adversarial unit and integration
tests, race testing, bounded fuzz smoke tests, static analysis, dependency
inventory, and known-vulnerability scanning. The evidence ledger records those
maintainer-run checks against named commits and dates; its results are
point-in-time evidence, not continuous assurance. The project has not received
an independent security audit, certification, or formal verification. Coverage
percentages, passing scanners, and a clean vulnerability database result are
evidence of specific checks—not proof that no vulnerability exists.

Beta 1 publication requires signed annotated source tags, but may precede the
complete prebuilt-artifact and key-recovery system. Signed binaries, checksums,
an SBOM, reproducible archives, and complete source/build provenance are
release-candidate and final-v1 gates. Their absence from a source-only beta must
not be read as evidence of artifact authenticity beyond the verified tag and
canonical source.

This policy is practical project guidance, not legal advice.