Verdict.

Security review for AI-written code

Your next customer will ask for a security review.

Paste a repository. In about a minute you will see what your AI assistant left behind, with the file and the line — and something to say when the questionnaire arrives.

Public scannerNo account needed

Public repositories on GitHub and GitLab. Nothing is executed and no code is stored — we read the files, record the findings, and drop the copy.

What it looks for

Six of the OWASP Top 10. Not five hundred findings.

A general-purpose scanner hands a three-person team four hundred findings, and four hundred findings get ignored. These are the OWASP categories that AI assistants get wrong most often — and every rule is measured against real repositories before it ships. On mature, well-reviewed code, our findings go to zero.

Why this exists

The review is the thing you hand over.

Most teams shipping AI-written code are not looking for a security program. They are looking for an answer to one question from one buyer, usually with a deadline attached.

The tools built for that question are sold on annual contracts to people with a security title. If your whole company is four people, nobody is selling to you — so this is built for the other end: install it, get an answer, move on.

We are honest about the edge of it. This maps to five of the OWASP Top 10 — the categories you can actually catch by reading code, in JavaScript, TypeScript, Python and SQL. We do not claim the whole list: half of it, like insecure design and SSRF, only shows up at runtime. Anyone selling you full OWASP coverage from a code scanner is selling you something.