UK PSTI Product Security Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
Publish a free, clear, accessible English reporting route plus expected acknowledgement and status-update times, and retain evidence that the information remained available.
State a working reporting route and realistic acknowledgment and status-update timings, then connect each report to triage, investigation, updates, remediation, and any statutory action.
A can satisfy the public-facing part of Schedule 1 when it gives reporters a usable route for security issues and states when they can expect acknowledgment and status updates until resolution. Manufacturers of in-scope UK consumer connectable products have had to publish that information since 29 April 2024. It must be available without prior request, without asking for personal information, in English, free of charge, and in a clear, accessible, transparent form. PSTI does not prescribe one email address, acknowledgment deadline, disclosure embargo, or remediation deadline for every manufacturer.
1
Section 1
What must the public reporting policy say?
A tells researchers, customers, and other reporters where and how to submit a suspected security issue. For PSTI, first confirm that the business is a manufacturer of a relevant connectable product intended, or known or reasonably expected, to be a UK consumer connectable product. The requirement has applied since 29 April 2024.
The visible policy must identify a usable reporting route and the timescales within which the reporter can expect acknowledgment of receipt and status updates until the reported issue is resolved. Set times that the security team can meet, and distinguish acknowledgment, triage, status updates, remediation, and public disclosure.
Optional policy wording to complete before publication: "Report security issues affecting [covered product models and software] through [working contact route]. We acknowledge receipt within [chosen period] and provide status updates every [chosen interval] until resolution." Replace every bracketed field and test the route. These timings are manufacturer choices, not government-set deadlines. Make the policy itself readable without an account, payment, prior request or provision of personal information.
Publish a monitored reporting channel, the information a reporter should provide, and a safe alternative if the primary channel fails.
State expected acknowledgment timing and how often or within what timescale status updates can be expected until resolution.
Explain which products and security issues the channel covers, without using scope language that blocks good-faith reports about a potentially in-scope product.
Keep vulnerability-handling instructions, legal terms, and any coordinated-disclosure request separate from the mandatory reporting route and timescales.
GOV.UK guidance identifying the PSTI Act 2022 and 2023 Regulations, covered products, roles, and security requirements.
2
Section 2
Who owns intake and which records should be kept?
Product security should own the intake and case process. Engineering owns technical investigation and fixes; customer support needs a route for forwarding reports; legal or compliance reviews scope, communications, and any notification duties created by an actual .
Evidence should prove that the published route worked and remained available. Keep the approved policy, publication URL, dated captures, monitoring records, test submissions, case timestamps, acknowledgment and update messages, resolution decisions, and links to affected product versions.
Assign a named operational owner and backup for each reporting channel, with alerts for delivery or certificate failures.
Test the public route without logging in or paying, and confirm that a non-technical visitor can find and understand it.
Measure actual acknowledgment and status-update performance against the published timescales; investigate missed commitments.
Retain the manufacturer's investigation or compliance-failure record for 10 years from the day the record is made when the report enters sections 10 to 12.
Check rebranding, outsourced channels, and older products
The reporting requirement belongs to the manufacturer. Importers, distributors, authorised representatives, support vendors, and parent companies can operate the channel, but the published route must get reports to the responsible manufacturer and must not obscure which products it covers.
A report can trigger duties beyond the public policy. Manufacturers must take all reasonable steps to investigate a reported possible and, if a failure exists, may need to prevent further supply, remedy it, notify OPSS and supply-chain actors, and maintain records. The policy itself does not replace those statutory steps.
Do not require a non-disclosure agreement, account, purchase proof, or payment before allowing a person to report a security issue.
Do not promise that every report will be fixed or publicly disclosed by a fixed date. Publish realistic acknowledgment and status-update times, then communicate case-specific remediation decisions.
Make the route usable for reports covering unsupported or older products; the support-period decision and the duty to receive security reports answer different questions.
Check rebranded products and multiple manufacturers carefully so reports reach every responsible manufacturer and the visible policy matches the product name consumers see.
Use one case workflow from receipt through closure. Log the report, protect sensitive details, acknowledge it within the published timescale, assess whether it concerns a covered product, investigate, give status updates, decide remediation and disclosure, and record the resolution.
When the facts indicate a possible PSTI , open the statutory investigation record and assess stop-supply, remediation, and notification duties separately. A general security weakness is not automatically a failure of a relevant security requirement, so document the rule and facts rather than assuming the legal result.
Receipt: create a case ID, preserve the original report, confirm safe contact details, and acknowledge receipt within the published timescale.
Triage: identify product, version, reproducibility, impact, reporter expectations, and whether immediate containment or supply-chain contact is needed.
Investigation and updates: assign technical ownership, record findings and decisions, and send status updates at the published cadence until resolution.
Closure: tell the reporter the case status to the extent appropriate, record remediation and disclosure decisions, verify the public channel still works, and preserve any records required by the Act.
Sections 10 to 12 govern manufacturer investigation, action, notification, and record duties when a possible or actual compliance failure is identified.
Schedule 1 sets the manufacturer requirement to publish how security issues can be reported and the timescales for acknowledgment and status updates until resolution.