chore: updated the Contributing and Security guides to reflect our current practices (#2579)

SECURITY.md

@@ -8,6 +8,51 @@ To report a security issue, please use the GitHub Security Advisory ["Report a V
 
 **Please do not report security vulnerabilities through public GitHub issues, discussions, or Discord.**
 
+## AI Assistance Notice
+
+> [!IMPORTANT]
+>
+> Automated AI-generated contributions without human review are not allowed and will be rejected.
+> This is an open-source project maintained by volunteers.
+> We do not have the resources to review pull requests that could have been avoided with proper human oversight.
+> While we have no issue with contributors using AI tools as an aid, it is your responsibility as a contributor to ensure that all submissions are carefully reviewed and meet our quality standards.
+> Submissions that appear to be unreviewed AI output will be considered low-effort and may result in a ban.
+>
+> If you are using **any kind of AI assistance** to contribute to Seerr,
+> it must be disclosed in the pull request.
+
+If you are using any kind of AI assistance while contributing to Seerr,
+**this must be disclosed in the pull request**, along with the extent to
+which AI assistance was used (e.g. docs only vs. code generation).
+If security advisory responses are being generated by an AI, disclose that as well.
+As a small exception, trivial tab-completion doesn't need to be disclosed,
+so long as it is limited to single keywords or short phrases.
+
+An example disclosure:
+
+> This security advisory was written primarily by Claude Code.
+
+Or a more detailed disclosure:
+
+> I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase but the solution
+> was fully authored manually by myself.
+
+Failure to disclose this is first and foremost rude to the human operators
+on the other end of the pull request, but it also makes it difficult to
+determine how much scrutiny to apply to the contribution.
+
+In a perfect world, AI assistance would produce equal or higher quality
+work than any human. That isn't the world we live in today, and in most cases
+it's generating slop. I say this despite being a fan of and using them
+successfully myself (with heavy supervision)!
+
+When using AI assistance, we expect contributors to understand the code
+that is produced and be able to answer critical questions about it. It
+isn't a maintainers job to review a PR so broken that it requires
+significant rework to be acceptable.
+
+Please be respectful to maintainers and disclose AI assistance.
+
 ## What to Include in Your Report
 
 To help us better understand and resolve the issue, please include as much of the following information as possible: