Skip to content

docs: Add SECURITY.md - #63

Merged
mc-nv merged 6 commits into
mainfrom
mchornyi/TRI-1935/fix-reports
Oct 6, 2026
Merged

mc-nv merged 6 commits into
mainfrom
mchornyi/TRI-1935/fix-reports

Conversation

@mc-nv

@mc-nv mc-nv commented Oct 2, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does the PR do?

  • Adds SECURITY.md, which this repository did not have. Flagged by an AIVO asset review.
  • Uses NVIDIA's current standard template, as in NVIDIA/NeMo, cuda-python and Megatron-LM. Text is NVIDIA-authored, unmodified except the platform-neutral "GitHub/GitLab" wording from cuda-python.
  • Reporting policy only: no threat model or architecture section.
  • Applied across all Triton repositories.

Checklist

  • PR title reflects the change and is of format <commit_type>: <Title>
  • Changes are described in the pull request.
  • Related issues are referenced.
  • Populated github labels field
  • Added test plan and verified test passes.
  • Verified that the PR passes existing CI.
  • Verified copyright is correct on all changed files.
  • Added succinct git squash message before merging ref.
  • All template sections are filled out.
  • Optional: Additional screenshots for behavior/output changes with before/after.

Commit Type:

Check the conventional commit type
box here and add the label to the github PR.

  • build
  • ci
  • docs
  • feat
  • fix
  • perf
  • refactor
  • revert
  • style
  • test

Related PRs:

Where should the reviewer start?

  • SECURITY.md — compare against NVIDIA/NeMo/SECURITY.md for the canonical wording.

Test plan:

  • Documentation only; no code paths affected.

  • CI Pipeline ID:

Caveats:

  • NVIDIA ships two variants of the warning sentence: NVIDIA/NeMo says "through GitHub", NVIDIA/cuda-python says "through GitHub/GitLab". This PR uses the latter because Triton repositories exist on both GitHub and internal GitLab.
  • The template's PGP wording is "we encourage you" rather than a hard requirement. Kept as-is for template fidelity; raised on docs: Adopt current NVIDIA SECURITY.md template server#8997.

Background

An AIVO asset review (securityportal.nvidia.com/aivo/assets) flagged Triton repositories with no SECURITY.md. Rather than authoring per-repository security documentation, every repository adopts NVIDIA's current standard template so the policy is identical everywhere and carries no repository-specific claims to maintain.

Related Issues: (use one of the action keywords Closes / Fixes / Resolves / Relates to)

  • Resolves: TRI-1935

@mc-nv mc-nv added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation (docs: PRs) label Oct 3, 2026
@mc-nv mc-nv self-assigned this Oct 3, 2026
@mc-nv
mc-nv marked this pull request as ready for review October 5, 2026 16:38
@greptile-apps

greptile-apps Bot commented Oct 5, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

RetriggerConfidence Score: 5/5

[Low risk] Adds security reporting guidance document.

The PR appears safe to merge; no new blocking issue was established.

Findings

  1. P2 Missing tensor validation assumption ▶
  2. P2 Missing trace path assumption ▶
  3. P2 Local hook boundary omitted ▶

Summary

The PR replaces the repository-specific security policy with NVIDIA’s standard vulnerability-reporting template.

  • Directs reports to NVIDIA’s submission form or PSIRT email.
  • Removes the former threat model and operational assumptions.

Reviews (4) · Last reviewed commit: "docs: Adopt current NVIDIA SECURITY.md t..."

Comment thread SECURITY.md Outdated
Comment thread SECURITY.md Outdated
Comment thread SECURITY.md Outdated

## Critical Security Assumptions

* The component is deployed in a trusted environment or behind a gateway that provides authentication, authorization, TLS and rate limiting.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Missing tensor validation assumption The revised assumptions no longer tell callers to validate tensor buffer sizes, shapes, data types, and memory types. Tensor stores these values without checking them, and the wrapper passes them to Triton unchanged. An embedding application that relies on the gateway assumption could miss the validation needed to avoid invalid memory access.

Comment thread SECURITY.md Outdated

## Critical Security Assumptions

* The component is deployed in a trusted environment or behind a gateway that provides authentication, authorization, TLS and rate limiting.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Missing trace path assumption The revised assumptions no longer say that trace output paths must remain under operator control. Trace settings accept a supplied path, and trace output opens that path directly. A gateway cannot restrict where an embedding application writes traces, so operators lose a warning against allowing request-controlled paths to overwrite files or consume disk space.

Comment thread SECURITY.md Outdated

**Software type:** Software component (library, backend, client or tool) used as part of a Triton Inference Server deployment.

**Security boundaries:** The main security boundary is between this component and the data, models and configuration it is given, and between it and the server or application that hosts it.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Local hook boundary omitted The new security-boundary description leaves out this repository’s add-license hook. It runs locally, accepts file paths, and rewrites them in place, following symlinks; a network gateway does not protect that filesystem boundary. Without the trusted-working-tree assumption, hook consumers lose the warning that supplied paths can lead to changes outside the intended repository.

@mc-nv
mc-nv merged commit 9224d13 into main Oct 6, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation (docs: PRs)

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants