Getting a polite bug report is not being harrased.

> This bug is subject to a 90-day disclosure deadline. If a fix for this issue is made available to users before the end of the 90-day deadline, this bug report will become public 30 days after the fix was made available. Otherwise, this bug report will become public at the deadline. The scheduled deadline is 2025-11-20 [https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/436510153]

Sounds like a threat to me. ffmpeg is a tiny team and Google is a goliath. Not to mention Google has used their AI to spam the same threat, about 8 times in the last few months https://ffmpeg.org/security.html

Google is hardly the first people to come up with the notion of responsible disclosure. Whether you agree or not with the practise, the goal is to balance the needs of the maintainer with the needs of consumers. In practise such practises have massively boosted security of computer systems.

There is a lot of historical context with this sort of thing that has lead to systems like this that has nothing to do with google.

Besides google did not sign an NDA, they aren't under any obligation to keep anything secret. 90 days is a courtesy. They are fully within their rights to just publish their findings immediately if they felt like it.

Fix it or we publish exploit code is not far off.

Well either you care about security or you don't.

If you don't then your users should have the right know, so they can decide for themselves whether or not the risk is worth it.

Do you think that just because a project doesn't disclose something it goes away, or that if google can find the bug that much better funded groups like the NSA or malware vendors can't. Shoving things under the rug is the worst outcome.

What absolute nonsense. There's a gulf of difference between "there's no way 500+ codecs contributed mostly by unpaid hobbyists is robust to hostile input" and "here's working exploit code."

So let them publish exploit code. What's the problem?