Incident Response Plan (IRP)
+ +Status: Draft
+ +Purpose
+This Incident Response Plan (IRP) defines the steps the project maintainer(s) will follow when handling security incidents related to the oauth2 gem. It is written for a small project with a single primary maintainer and is intended to be practical, concise, and actionable.
Scope
+Applies to security incidents that affect the oauth2 codebase, releases (gems), CI/CD infrastructure related to building and publishing the gem, repository credentials, or any compromise of project infrastructure that could impact users.
Key assumptions
+-
+
- This project is maintained primarily by a single maintainer. +
- Public vulnerability disclosure is handled via Tidelift (see
SECURITY.md).
+ - The maintainer will act as incident commander unless otherwise delegated. +
Contact & Roles
+-
+
- Incident Commander: Primary maintainer (repo owner). Responsible for coordinating triage, remediation, and communications. +
- Secondary Contact: (optional) A trusted collaborator or organization contact if available. +
If you are an external reporter
+-
+
- Do not publicly disclose details of an active vulnerability before coordination via Tidelift. +
- See
SECURITY.mdfor Tidelift disclosure instructions. If the reporter has questions and cannot use Tidelift, they may open a direct encrypted report as described inSECURITY.md(if available) or email the maintainer contact listed in the repository.
+
Incident Handling Workflow (high level)
+-
+
- Identification & Reporting
+
-
+
- Reports may arrive via Tidelift, issue tracker, direct email, or third-party advisories. +
- Immediately acknowledge receipt (within 24-72 hours) via the reporting channel. +
+ - Triage & Initial Assessment (first 72 hours)
+
-
+
- Confirm the report is not duplicative and gather: reproducer, affected versions, attack surface, exploitability, and CVSS-like severity estimate. +
- Verify the issue against the codebase and reproduce locally if possible. +
- Determine scope: which versions are affected, whether the issue is in code paths executed in common setups, and whether a workaround exists. +
+ - Containment & Mitigation
+
-
+
- If a simple mitigation or workaround (configuration change, safe default, or recommended upgrade) exists, document it clearly in the issue/Tidelift advisory. +
- If immediate removal of a release is required (rare), consult Tidelift for coordinated takedown and notify package hosts if applicable. +
+ - Remediation & Patch
+
-
+
- Prepare a fix in a branch with tests and changelog entries. Prefer minimal, well-tested changes. +
- Include tests that reproduce the faulty behavior and demonstrate the fix. +
- Hardening: add fuzz tests, input validation, or additional checks as appropriate. +
+ - Release & Disclosure
+
-
+
- Coordinate disclosure through Tidelift per
SECURITY.mdtimelines. Aim for a coordinated disclosure and patch release to minimize risk to users.
+ - Publish a patch release (increment gem version) and an advisory via Tidelift. +
- Update
CHANGELOG.mdand repository release notes with non-sensitive details.
+
+ - Coordinate disclosure through Tidelift per
- Post-Incident
+
-
+
- Produce a short postmortem: timeline, root cause, actions taken, and follow-ups. +
- Add/adjust tests and CI checks to prevent regressions. +
- If credentials or infrastructure were compromised, rotate secrets and audit access. +
+
Severity classification (guidance)
+-
+
- High/Critical: Remote code execution, data exfiltration, or any vulnerability that can be exploited without user interaction. Immediate action and prioritized patching. +
- Medium: Privilege escalation, sensitive information leaks that require specific conditions. Patch in the next release cycle with advisory. +
- Low: Minor information leaks, UI issues, or non-exploitable bugs. Fix normally and include in the next scheduled release. +
Preservation of evidence
+-
+
- Preserve all reporter-provided data, logs, and reproducer code in a secure location (local encrypted storage or private branch) for the investigation. +
- Do not publish evidence that would enable exploitation before coordinated disclosure. +
Communication templates
+Acknowledgement (to reporter)
+ +“Thank you for reporting this issue. I’ve received your report and will triage it within 72 hours. If you can, please provide reproduction steps, affected versions, and any exploit PoC. I will coordinate disclosure through Tidelift per the project’s security policy.”
+ +Public advisory (after patch is ready)
+ +“A security advisory for oauth2 (versions X.Y.Z) has been published via Tidelift. Please upgrade to version A.B.C which patches [brief description]. See the advisory for details and recommended mitigations.”
+ +Runbook: Quick steps for a maintainer to patch and release
+-
+
- Create a branch:
git checkout -b fix/security-brief-description+
+ - Reproduce the issue locally and add a regression spec in
spec/.
+ - Implement the fix and run the test suite:
bundle exec rspec(or the project’s preferred test command).
+ - Bump version in
lib/oauth2/version.rbfollowing semantic versioning.
+ - Update
CHANGELOG.mdwith an entry describing the fix (avoid exploit details).
+ - Commit and push the branch, open a PR, and merge after approvals. +
- Build and push the gem:
gem build oauth2.gemspec && gem push pkg/...(coordinate with Tidelift before public push if disclosure is coordinated).
+ - Publish a release on GitHub and ensure the Tidelift advisory is posted. +
Operational notes
+-
+
- Secrets: Use local encrypted storage for any sensitive reporter data. If repository or CI secrets may be compromised, rotate them immediately and update dependent services. +
- Access control: Limit who can publish gems and who has admin access to the repo. Keep an up-to-date list of collaborators in a secure place. +
Legal & regulatory
+-
+
- If the incident involves user data or has legal implications, consult legal counsel or the maintainers’ employer as appropriate. The maintainer should document the timeline and all communications. +
Retrospective & continuous improvement
+After an incident, perform a brief post-incident review covering:
+-
+
- What happened and why +
- What was done to contain and remediate +
- What tests or process changes will prevent recurrence +
- Assign owners and deadlines for follow-up tasks +
References
+-
+
- See
SECURITY.mdfor the project’s official disclosure channel (Tidelift).
+
Appendix: Example checklist for an incident
+-
+
- +Acknowledge report to reporter (24-72 hours) +
- +Reproduce and classify severity +
- +Prepare and test a fix in a branch +
- +Coordinate disclosure via Tidelift +
- +Publish patch release and advisory +
- +Postmortem and follow-up actions +