Happy path only
Generated code tends to handle the expected case. Failures, odd input and abuse are where it breaks.
Security & quality review
Vibe Code Review
AI can get an app running fast. Before real users and real data arrive, get a second pair of expert eyes on how safe and solid the code really is.
- Auth & access control
- Secrets & configuration
- Injection & input
- Data exposure
Why review
Working isn't the same as safe
Code written with AI tools usually does what the demo needs. The gaps show up later, when real people use it or someone starts probing it.
Quiet security gaps
Missing access rules, exposed keys and unvalidated input don't show up in a demo. They show up when someone looks for them.
Code nobody has read
If you didn't write it and nobody reviewed it, it's hard to fix or extend. A review gives you a map of what's there.
What I check
The areas that matter most
Every project is different, but these are where AI-built apps most often need attention.
Authentication & access
Login flows, sessions, role checks and database access rules, including Supabase row-level security and PostgreSQL policies.
Secrets & configuration
Keys committed to the repo, environment handling, and the line between public and server-only credentials.
Input & injection
Validation, SQL and NoSQL injection, cross-site scripting, unsafe file uploads and redirects.
Data exposure
API responses that return too much, public storage buckets, and logs that leak personal data.
Dependencies & deployment
Outdated or risky packages, CORS, security headers, and build and hosting settings.
Quality & reliability
Error handling, race conditions, test coverage and structure that will be painful to change later.
How it works
Three steps, no surprises
Send the project
Share a repository link or a zip, and tell me what the app does and what worries you. Read-only access is enough.
I review it
I go through the code and, where it makes sense, run the app, focusing on the areas above.
You get a clear report
Findings ranked by severity: what's wrong, why it matters and how to fix it. Fixes are available as a follow-up if you want them.
What you get
- Findings ranked from critical to low
- Each risk explained in plain language
- Concrete fix guidance, with code where it helps
- A short summary you can share with your team or client
- Optional: I implement the fixes
A good fit if
You built your app with AI coding tools such as Cursor, Lovable, Bolt, v0 or Claude Code, and it's heading to real users or real data.
A review lowers risk, but it can't prove an app is free of vulnerabilities. I'll tell you exactly what was and wasn't covered.
Questions
Before you reach out
Do you need access to production data?
No. The code and its configuration are enough. I don't need production data or admin credentials.
Which stacks do you cover?
I'm strongest with TypeScript and JavaScript, Supabase, PostgreSQL, Node backends and typical full-stack web apps. If you use something else, ask and I'll tell you honestly if it's a fit.
What does it cost?
It depends on the size and scope of the project. Send the details and I'll reply with a quote.
Will you fix the issues too?
If you want. The review and the fixes are separate, so you decide whether to do them yourself, with your team, or with me.
Is my code kept private?
Yes. Your code and the findings stay confidential.
Get a review
Tell me about your app
Share what it does, the stack and what worries you. I'll reply with the scope and a quote.
What to include
- A repository link or a zip (read-only access is fine)
- What the app does and who uses it
- The stack and where it's hosted
- Anything you're already worried about
Write to me directly
Send a short description of the project and what you need.
Or email me directly: varlivoapp@gmail.com
English or Turkish. I usually reply within 24 hours.