meta: refine the security vuln posture for experimental flagged features - #65438
Closed
jasnell wants to merge 4 commits into
Closed
meta: refine the security vuln posture for experimental flagged features#65438jasnell wants to merge 4 commits into
jasnell wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Review requested:
|
BethGriggs
reviewed
Aug 21, 2026
Currently, any runtime gated experimental feature security vulnerability is considered a "valid" vulnerability, even if the work is still very much work in progress. This adds friction because it ends up requiring that things be compile time gated which makes it more difficult if there is not a corresponding CI job to run tests. This relaxes the policy a bit. For anything that is 1.0 and 1.1, a vuln report is only valid if it directly compromises a stable feature, allows a workaround that compromises a stable feature, etc. An example would be an obvious DOS vector that can be exploited even if the feature is not enabled, for instance. This gives us leeway to reject vuln reports on things that are enabled only by `--experimental-*` runtime flag that are still works in progress. Signed-off-by: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Given it's complexity and active development, give ourselves coverage by specifically excluding QUIC/H3 from vuln reports. Any vuln reports received for QUIC, unless it's something that can compromise security of something else in Node.js when the `--experimental-quic` runtime flag is not enabled, should be handled as regular issues and not as security vulns Signed-off-by: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
jasnell
force-pushed
the
jasnell/refine-security-vuln-posture-for-experimental
branch
from
August 21, 2026 15:58
e29539d to
15f3ea3
Compare
marco-ippolito
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2026
legendecas
reviewed
Aug 21, 2026
jasnell
commented
Aug 26, 2026
RafaelGSS
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2026
RafaelGSS
added
the
notable-change
Contributor
|
The
notable-change
Please suggest a text for the release notes if you'd like to include a more detailed summary, then proceed to update the PR description with the text or a link to the notable change suggested text comment. Otherwise, the commit will be placed in the Other Notable Changes section. |
jasnell
commented
Aug 26, 2026
BethGriggs
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2026
legendecas
approved these changes
Aug 26, 2026
jasnell
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 27, 2026
Currently, any runtime gated experimental feature security vulnerability is considered a "valid" vulnerability, even if the work is still very much work in progress. This adds friction because it ends up requiring that things be compile time gated which makes it more difficult if there is not a corresponding CI job to run tests. This relaxes the policy a bit. For anything that is 1.0 and 1.1, a vuln report is only valid if it directly compromises a stable feature, allows a workaround that compromises a stable feature, etc. An example would be an obvious DOS vector that can be exploited even if the feature is not enabled, for instance. This gives us leeway to reject vuln reports on things that are enabled only by `--experimental-*` runtime flag that are still works in progress. Given it's complexity and active development, give ourselves coverage by specifically excluding QUIC/H3 from vuln reports. Any vuln reports received for QUIC, unless it's something that can compromise security of something else in Node.js when the `--experimental-quic` runtime flag is not enabled, should be handled as regular issues and not as security vulns Signed-off-by: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> PR-URL: #65438 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rafael Gonzaga <rafael.nunu@hotmail.com> Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bethanyngriggs@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gürgün Dayıoğlu <hey@gurgun.day> Reviewed-By: Chengzhong Wu <legendecas@gmail.com>
Member
Author
|
Landed in c66ae4f |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
9 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Currently, any runtime gated experimental feature security vulnerability is considered a "valid" vulnerability, even if the work is still very much work in progress. This adds friction because it ends up requiring that things be compile time gated which makes it more difficult if there is not a corresponding CI job to run tests.
This relaxes the policy a bit. For anything that is 1.0 and 1.1, a vuln report is only valid if it directly compromises a stable feature, allows a workaround that compromises a stable feature, etc. An example would be an obvious DOS vector that can be exploited even if the feature is not enabled, for instance.
This gives us leeway to reject vuln reports on things that are enabled only by
--experimental-*runtime flag that are still works in progress.