CNCF Incident Response Process
Creates or updates an incident response plan with the step-by-step process for triaging, remediating, and disclosing a confirmed security vulnerability.
When to Use
Use when:
- A project has never formally documented how it responds to a confirmed vulnerability
- The project is expanding its security team and needs a shared runbook
- A post-incident review revealed gaps in the response process
Do NOT use when:
- The project does not yet have a
SECURITY.md— the reporting channel must exist before defining the response process; run the security-policy skill first
Steps
Fetch the template. If GitHub MCP available:
github_get_contentspath=cncf/tag-security/main/project-resources/templates/INCIDENT-RESPONSE.mdOtherwise:gh api repos/cncf/tag-security/contents/project-resources/templates/INCIDENT-RESPONSE.mdFill in Triage: who is notified first, severity rating (CVSS or project-defined), decision criteria for patch vs. mitigate.
Fill in Remediation: branching strategy, who has access to private security forks, how patches are tested without public disclosure. ⚠️ Access to private forks must be defined now — unclear access during an active incident delays patching.
Fill in Coordinated Disclosure: how downstream distributors are notified before public disclosure, embargo period, and GitHub Security Advisory publishing process. ⚠️ Verify the timeline matches the response timeline in SECURITY.md — inconsistencies are a graduation finding.
Fill in Communication: what the public announcement includes, which channels are used (GitHub Security Advisory, project mailing list), who approves. ⚠️ One named person must own each active incident; "the security contacts will handle it" is not a runbook.
Fill in Post-Incident Review: blameless retrospective process and how learnings feed back into the security policy.
Cross-link to the security self-assessment under Remediation or Post-Incident Review.
Checklist
- Triage process documented with severity definitions
- Private patch development access defined by name/role (graduation)
- Coordinated disclosure timeline defined and consistent with SECURITY.md (graduation)
- Named incident commander role defined (graduation)
- Public communication plan documented
- Post-incident review process defined
- Cross-link to security self-assessment present (graduation)
- GitHub Security Advisory draft workflow verified accessible to all contacts (graduation)
Knowledge Reference
- CNCF Incident Response: https://contribute.cncf.io/projects/best-practices/security/
- CNCF TAG Security: https://github.com/cncf/tag-security
- GitHub Security Advisories: https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/security-advisories
Constraints
MUST DO
- Cite authoritative primary sources (official documentation, RFCs, standards bodies) — avoid secondary or blog references
- Include version-specific guidance when the reference topic has significant version-dependent behavior
- Structure reference content with clear navigation: overview first, then detailed subsections organized by use case
- Keep examples minimal and self-contained so readers can copy-paste without needing external context
MUST NOT DO
- Do not present opinionated practices as facts — distinguish between standards, recommendations, and personal preferences
- Avoid outdated API references or deprecated patterns; explicitly note version requirements for each code example
- Never include incomplete or pseudocode examples in reference materials — all examples should be runnable
- Do not conflate different product versions when documenting features that vary across releases