STATUS: ACTIVE
CLASSIFICATION: SECURITY AUDIT
When was the last time
someone actually read
your code for vulnerabilities?
Not a linter. Not a CI check that passes because nobody configured the rules. An actual line-by-line review by something that knows what an injection attack looks like in Python, Java, Go, Rust, PHP, JavaScript, and C#.
Paste your most "production-ready" code. Let's see what's hiding in it.
Dare You to Paste Your Code
Most developers think their code is secure. Code Auditor thinks otherwise. Here's what it checks — through conversation, not a dashboard.
Injection Attacks
SQL injection, NoSQL injection, OS command injection, LDAP injection. If it touches user input and a query, it's getting flagged.
Broken Authentication
Weak token generation, missing session expiry, hardcoded credentials, insecure password storage. The stuff that makes breaches happen.
XSS & CSRF
Cross-site scripting, cross-site request forgery, unescaped output, missing CSRF tokens. Every template, every render call.
Race Conditions
Time-of-check to time-of-use, concurrent access without locks, double-spend patterns. Concurrency bugs that only show up in production.
Performance Bottlenecks
N+1 queries, unbounded loops, missing indexes in ORM calls, memory leaks from unclosed resources. The slow death of your server.
Best Practice Violations
Language-specific anti-patterns, deprecated APIs, missing error handling, exposed stack traces. Clean code isn't optional for security.
What Happens When You Submit
It's a conversation, not a pipeline. Here's how it works.
You paste code. Any language.
Python, JavaScript, Java, Go, C#, Rust, PHP — drop it in the chat. A function, a class, an entire module. Code Auditor will ask you for context: Is this a web app? An API? A library? What framework?
It reads every line like a hostile attacker would.
Each input vector, each trust boundary, each assumption your code makes. It checks against OWASP Top 10, language-specific pitfalls, and common anti-patterns that static analyzers miss.
You get a graded report. Right in the chat.
Every finding tagged Critical, High, Medium, Low, or Info. The vulnerable snippet quoted. The risk explained in plain language. The fixed version ready to copy. Ask follow-up questions — it'll elaborate on any finding.
— FIELD NOTES FROM USERS —
"Pasted a Django view I'd written at 2am. It found three injection points I completely missed. The fixed versions actually worked."
— Marcus, backend dev"I asked it to review my Go error handling. It didn't just find bugs — it explained why my approach would fail under concurrent load."
— Priya, SRE"Not a replacement for a real pentest, but it catches the stuff I'm embarrassed to push to code review. Basically my pre-PR sanity check."
— Tom, full-stackLanguages in the Dossier
Other languages? Ask. If it compiles (or interprets), Code Auditor can probably read it.
Declassified: FAQ
No. Code Auditor is an AI chat assistant — it's good at spotting common vulnerability patterns, OWASP Top 10 issues, and code smells, but it can't replace a professional penetration test or a dedicated SAST/DAST pipeline. Think of it as a knowledgeable second pair of eyes before your code goes to review, not as your entire security strategy.
You can paste substantial code blocks — a few hundred lines at a time works well. For larger codebases, break it into logical units (a single module, a class, an endpoint handler) and review them in sequence. You can also upload files as attachments for Code Auditor to analyze.
It understands framework-specific patterns — Django ORM vs raw SQL, Express middleware chains, Spring Security configurations, Go's goroutine patterns, and more. That's why it asks about context first. Telling it "this is a Django REST Framework serializer" versus "this is a Flask route" changes what it looks for.
No. Code Auditor is a chat-based AI — it can't connect to external services, access repositories, or integrate with pipelines. You paste or upload code directly into the conversation. This also means your code doesn't get stored in or sent to any third-party service beyond the chat itself.
Critical: Exploitable now, data loss or RCE likely. High: Serious vulnerability, exploitable with moderate effort. Medium: Real risk but requires specific conditions. Low: Minor issue, defense-in-depth concern. Info: Best practice suggestion, not a direct vulnerability. These follow standard security assessment conventions.
Your code has vulnerabilities.
Find them before someone else does.
Paste your code. Get a severity-graded audit. No signup hoops, no credit card, no "schedule a demo." Just you, a chat window, and the truth about your code.
START THE AUDITI'm an AI, not a certified auditor — but I can catch what your linter won't.