Impossible Means Go™It runs, your customers log in, and everything looks right. Working is not the same as safe. Find the holes in your AI-built app before a customer, or a hacker, finds them for you.
Read-only. One GitHub repo. Your code is never changed or run.
For apps built with
What owners tell themselves
I asked AI if it was secure. It said yes.
The tool that took the shortcut is grading its own work. It checks what you show it, never the whole app.
Lovable handles security.
The platform hands you the locks. Your AI tool decides whether to use them. In one scan of 1,645 Lovable apps, 170 let anyone read their users’ details.
Nobody knows the address.
Nobody picks you. Automated tools sweep the internet for open databases and leaked keys around the clock.
I deleted that key months ago.
It is still in your project’s history, and it still works until you replace it.
It works fine.
Working is not the same as safe. A hole makes no noise.
No customer has complained.
The first sign is usually a customer writing to you about it.
I’ll get it checked once it’s bigger.
Every customer you add is more of their data in the same unchecked app.
Hi,
I logged in this morning and I can see another customer’s information. I don’t think I’m supposed to have access to this.
Can you tell me whether someone else can see mine?
An illustration, not a real email.
Imagine this arriving tomorrow
A sample audit report
Each problem: what is at risk, in plain English, and the prompt that fixes it.
member-portal · invented app
All 34 in the full sample →src/lib/supabase.ts, line 14
One member who opens the browser’s developer tools can download every member’s name, email and uploaded files.
In Supabase, turn on row level security for the members table. Add a policy so a signed-in user can select only the rows where user_id equals auth.uid(). Then change src/lib/supabase.ts line 14 so it asks only for the signed-in member's own row.
src/lib/admin.ts, line 6
Anyone who views your page source can copy the key and read, change or delete every row in your database, without even signing up.
My app uses the Supabase service key in browser code through VITE_SUPABASE_SERVICE_KEY in src/lib/admin.ts. Move every call that needs that key into a server function, read the key there from an environment variable without the VITE_ prefix, and remove VITE_SUPABASE_SERVICE_KEY from the project.
VITE_, which is copied into the code every browser downloads.api/signup.ts, line 15
A stranger can create their own admin account in a minute and see and change everything.
In api/signup.ts, stop spreading req.body into the insert. Save only name, email and password hash, and always set role to 'member' on the server.
src/pages/Checkout.tsx, line 51
Anyone who gets into the database leaves with your customers’ cards. Storing them at all breaks the card networks’ rules.
Remove the payments insert from src/pages/Checkout.tsx and collect cards only with Stripe Elements or Stripe Checkout. Then write a migration that deletes the card_number, expiry and cvc columns.
The app in this sample is invented. The report was produced by the same code that writes yours. Open the full sample report →
A broader look
Every one of the 19 areas gets an answer: what we found, checked and clean, or not checked and why. Here they are grouped by what they protect, for the sample app. Open any group to see its areas.
8problems
Who can see whose records, what personal and card details are kept, and whether you can get data back after a mistake.
3problems
Keys and passwords sitting in your code or its history, where anyone who looks can use them.
11problems
What strangers can type into your app, what your AI features do when pushed, and where the app gives wrong answers or breaks.
5problems
Who can sign in, who can make themselves an admin, and who can still change your code.
7problems
Whether you would notice a problem, what the app costs as it grows, and whether someone else could take it over.
How it works
Tell us your name, email, business and the link to your GitHub repo.
Install our GitHub app on that one repo. GitHub shows you it can only read.
A link by email within 2 business days, with a fix prompt for each problem.
Your code
You choose one repo, and our app can only read it. Remove our access any time.
When the AI asks for a file, we hand it that one file. Anthropic may not train on it.
A person reviews the report. Our copy of your code is deleted, and your report shows when.
What this is not: a test of your live app, your hosting or your database settings. Where a problem depends on one of those, the report says which setting and where to find it.
Why this audit exists
The AI that built your app should not be the one that tells you it’s safe.
It reviews what you show it and agrees with what it wrote. Your app needs a reader that goes through every file and has no reason to say yes. I built this audit to be that reader.
Who built this audit
I’m Atiba de Souza. I was a software architect before I was a marketer, and I’ve been running AI inside my own companies since about 2014.
In January 2024 I stood on Ryan Deiss’s stage and told the room that every business would soon have AI agents doing real work inside it. That is where we are now.
So if you went and learned to build with AI, good on you. You did something most owners never will.
Building it was the hard part. Checking it should not be left to the tool that built it.
Dr. Lisa Faast, CEO of DiversifyRx, and her build partner Jason Spaven had us audit the app they built, at our Las Vegas event in October 2026. They had started from a sound structure, and the audit still found problems. They used the report to fix their app.
What the audit changes
Today you cannot see what is wrong. After the audit you know each problem, where it is, and the prompt that fixes it.
Your app looks fine, so nothing tells you where to look.
Each with its file, its line, and what it puts at risk.
You paste each prompt into your AI tool, then run the check that proves it worked.
We read your app from a GitHub repository. If your app is not in one yet, here is how to connect it, from each tool’s own guide.
The form asks for the GitHub link before you pay, so you cannot pay for an audit we have no way to start.
Get your audit
One repo, read in full by our audit. You get the report, the order to fix things in, and a prompt for each fix.
Fix prompts
Fix the customer table so each user can only read their own rows…Fix plan
App Audit
Every one of the 19 areas marked: found, clean, or not checked.
Numbers from the sample report. Yours are counted from your own code.
$97
One repo, read in full. Your report within 2 business days.
We read it. We never change it, run it, sell it or publish it. It is sent to Anthropic’s AI under terms that say Anthropic may not train models on it, and Anthropic deletes it within 30 days under its standard terms. Our copy is deleted when your report is done, and the report shows when.
We only read the code. We never log in to your live site, connect to your database, touch your customers’ data or use any outside service your app is connected to, even when a key for it is sitting in your code. Where a finding depends on a setting in one of those, the report says which setting and where you find it.
No, and no honest code review can say that. Reading code finds what is in the code. It cannot see your live settings, and it cannot prove a running app is safe. What you get is a clear list of what we found, and what we checked and could not check.
If we cannot get into your repo, if our audit fails, or if you have not connected your repo within 72 hours, we refund you in full.
Yes. Every finding says what is wrong in plain words, what could happen to your customers because of it, and the fix in one line. Each one comes with a prompt you paste straight into your AI tool to fix it.
No. The report is yours to act on. Each finding comes with a prompt your own AI tool can follow to make the change, written after re-reading the file it changes. We do not fix code.
You fill in one form, pay, and install our GitHub app on one repo. The report arrives within 2 business days of connecting your repo.
Yes, if your code is in GitHub: Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Lovable, Bolt and Replit all work. The GitHub section shows how to connect the last three.
Either. Both go through the same read-only GitHub app.
Because the AI does the reading, which is the part that used to take a security firm days, and people review its report. It is also how we meet owners who build: at the end of your report we tell you what we offer next. It is a code read, not a test of your live app, so it does not replace a full security test once your app holds a lot of customer data.
$97 is the whole price of the audit. At the end of your report we tell you what we offer next. You do not have to buy anything to get or keep your report.
The reviews built into Claude Code and Codex check what just changed. Ours reads the whole app, its full history, and who can reach whose data, and says what it did not check. The answer below this one shows what each review checks.
You may already run the review your AI tool comes with. Here is what each one is built to look at, in its maker’s own documentation.
/code-review checks the changes on your branch and looks for bugs. It runs inside the session where you are working, following the same project instructions that session follows. You can point it at a folder, but only if you know which folder to ask about./security-review is told to look only at security problems your new changes add, not the ones already in the app./review checks your uncommitted changes, one commit, or a branch against the one it came from. On GitHub, it reviews the changes in a pull request and flags only the two highest priority levels.A review of what just changed never looks again at the code from your first month of building, which is where the oldest shortcuts sit.
© 2026 DF5 Holdings LLC