Who can review code generated by Cursor before launch?
I can. I review apps written with Cursor, Claude Code or any AI coding tool, read the code by hand, and send prioritized findings and a fixed quote in 3 business days for $490.
Commits written with Claude Code leaked secrets at about 3.2%, twice the baseline rate across public GitHub.
What AI-written code tends to miss
Coding agents write code that runs. They are less reliable about what the code allows: they repeat patterns from the prompt, skip checks nobody asked for, and rarely test the unhappy path.
- Authorization checks missing on some routes but not others.
- Input passed to queries, shell commands or HTML without validation.
- Old or vulnerable dependencies added by the agent.
- Secrets in the repo history, even if they were later removed.
- Several copies of the same logic that have drifted apart.
What I do
I read the whole repo, not just the diff, run the flows that handle users and money, and check the deploy and database settings. Each finding comes with where it is, why it matters and how to fix it.
How it works
- Free teardown: a 5 to 10 min recording of what a stranger can see and break in your live Cursor app.
- Launch Audit, $490: I read the code and the backend and send prioritized findings and a fixed quote in 3 business days.
- Quick Fix, $750: one blocker fixed and deployed in 3 business days.
- Fix & Launch Sprint, from $2,500: the audited issues fixed and the app taken live in 1 to 3 weeks.