llm-doc-extractor reads a document and a field schema, and asks a chosen LLM
provider (or a no-key demo mode) to return matching JSON. This file defines
what counts as a security issue in that specific tool.
Use GitHub's private vulnerability reporting on this repository: Security → Report a vulnerability. It opens a private thread; nothing becomes public until there is a fix.
If that is not available to you, email hello@dkautomation.dev with
llm-doc-extractor in the subject line.
Include the commit or version you ran, the exact command, and what happened. A proof of concept is welcome; a scanner's raw output usually is not.
Do not open a public issue for a vulnerability.
No tagged releases yet — the main branch is the supported version. Report
against the commit you actually ran.
| First reply | within 3 working days |
| Assessment | within 7 working days of the first reply |
| Fix or a stated decision not to fix | within 30 days for anything reproducible |
Single-person commitments, not a company SLA.
The document given with --doc is often someone else's file (an invoice, a
contract) — treat its content as untrusted. The schema given with --schema
is normally your own, but its field description text is also placed into
the model prompt verbatim, so it is worth the same caution.
In scope:
- Content inside the document, or inside a schema field's
description, that changes what the tool does rather than what it extracts — in particular, makes it read, write, or send a file other than the ones named on the command line (--doc,--schema,--out). - The document or schema causing
ANTHROPIC_API_KEY/OPENAI_API_KEY, or their values, to appear in output, logs, or a request to a host other than the selected provider's own API. --provider ollamabeing made to reach a host other than the local Ollama endpoint it is hard-coded to call.
Out of scope:
- The model returning a wrong or hallucinated field value — an accuracy problem with the provider/model you chose, not a vulnerability here.
- The
demoprovider's rule-based extractor missing a field it was never designed to parse (it has no model behind it). - PDF text-extraction quality — that is
pypdf's behaviour, not this repository's.
Named in the fix's release notes if you want that; say so if you would rather not be.
There is no bug bounty.