I used the term vetted role because vetted is the term that appears in the user profile, to users that on Drupal.org have the Git administrator role.
In places listing the possible roles Drupal.org can have, Git vetted user is one of them.
Before the ability of opting into security advisory coverage was introduced, that role allowed users to create a full project; without that role, user were only able to create sandbox projects. That is when the vetted role was introduced.
Nowadays, the documentation speaks of being able to opt into security coverage, for example Apply for permission to opt into security advisory coverage or Security advisory process and permissions policy. The term vetted is still mentioned in those pages, but in Security advisory process and permissions policy it appears only once. (It's probable that most users would not catch what vetted means, nor they will notice that term.)
Today, users who want to apply to opt into security coverage for the projects they create are the ones going to get the vetted role. Those aren't the only users who have that role, though. The vetted role has been given to:
Users who have asked for the permission to be able to create full project (and not only sandbox projects). Now every user, even the ones who don't have the confirmed role, can create full projects, but they still need the vetted role to opt into security coverage for the projects they create.
Users who in the past asked for the permission to commit code into the Drupal.org CVS repository. Now Drupal.org uses Git (in particular an instance of Gitlab running on a drupal.org sub-domain), but the users who asked to be able to write in the Drupal.org CVS repository had the vetted role given them.
I am one of the users who has reviewed the requests to get the vetted role since the time Drupal.org used CVS.