Cybersecurity

It's not great from either side here, really. Precise guidelines for responsible disclosure vary, but none would ever say "go public after trying to contact the developers once and not hearing back for a week".

ZDI's policy says that after 5 days they attempt contact again. After another 5 days, they'll try any intermediaries or other ways of contacting they can think of up until 15 days after the initial contact. If at any point before that, the developers acknowledge the problem, ZDI gives up to 120 days to resolve the problem (from date of acknowledgement). They imply (without having a specific policy laid out) that more time will be given beyond that if it's reasonably needed.

All of OP's comments have been deleted so I don't know what they tried exactly, but it certainly seems like they didn't try hard enough. It also seems like Lemmy's devs may not have been responsive enough. Ideally, they would have a /.well-known/security.txt file with an email address that is actively monitored explicitly for security disclosures. Failing that, whatever public method they do have for contact that OP used, assuming it was a mode of communication that could reasonably be expected to be monitored, should have been monitored.

I actually don't think that GitHub is an appropriate place to be doing security vulnerability disclosures. GitHub might not be user-facing, but it's still public. You can maybe put something in there essentially as a way to tag "hey, be on the lookout for a real disclosure", but any actual details should not be on GitHub. In this case, if the email didn't work, OP should have posted something on GitHub saying "hey, major security flaw, please check your email for details". If OP really doesn't want to use GitHub, they should have requested someone else do that on their behalf—maybe via a sufficiently vague post on Lemmy. What's absolutely clear that they should not have done, is gone public with all the details based on a single attempt at emailing and one week of waiting.