Symptom

A key that should have stayed on your server is in the page.

Everything your application hands the browser is public, whatever the variable was called. The question is never whether somebody could read it; it is which of your credentials went out and what each one is permitted to do.

Secrets that shipped to the browser

What it looks like

Nothing, until an invoice arrives for usage you cannot account for, a provider suspends you for abuse, or a stranger emails to say they found a credential in your site. The value is sitting in the JavaScript your domain serves, and reading it takes a browser the visitor already has open.

Why it actually happens

A call needed a credential, the credential was not available where that code was running, and the shortest path past the error was to mark the value as public so the build would accept it. Bundlers make that a one-word change. Sometimes the value was pasted directly into a component instead. Either way the build now treats it as content to ship, and it leaves with every page.

How we find out which one it is

We read the built output rather than your source, because what ships is the only thing that counts, and match anything credential-shaped in it against the providers you use. Then we pull each provider's own activity record to see whether that credential has been used from addresses that are not yours, which is the line between an exposure and an incident.

What the fix touches

Rotation first, on everything that went out, before anything else is tidied. Then the calls that needed those values move to the server, so the browser asks your application and your application holds the credential. Where a provider does publish a browser-side value on purpose, it gets restricted by domain and by permission instead, so the public half can do only the one thing it exists for.

Can I rotate a credential without taking the site down?
Most providers let a replacement exist alongside the old value long enough for you to deploy, and we sequence it that way. Where one does not, there is a short window, and we agree when it happens rather than discovering it together.
How much could this already have cost me?
You are charged for whatever the credential did, so the honest answer comes from the provider's usage record rather than from us. We pull it during the audit, and where it shows nothing unusual you have a documented reason to stop worrying about it.
What if it is in my git history as well?
Treat it as compromised and rotate it. History is copied by everybody who clones the repository, and public history is read continuously by scanners built for exactly this. Rewriting the history afterwards is optional and far less urgent than the rotation.

How it works

Audit

$199$349promo

You send a link, a repo, or both. We reproduce the problem, read the code, and record a short walkthrough: what's broken, why it broke, and what it takes to fix. You get written findings and a fixed quote.

Book my audit

Full Fix

Priced after the audit

Scoped from the audit and agreed before anything starts. We fix the cause rather than the symptom, and hand back something maintainable, with a written note on what changed and why.

Nobody can price this honestly before seeing the code. The audit is what makes a firm number possible.

The audit is a fixed price and you know it before you pay. Everything after it is quoted from what the audit actually found, and you approve the number before any work starts.

Why trust us with it

What we can show you is who does the work, what it costs, and how well we already know the failure you are staring at.

A desk at night, the walkthrough being recorded

A small agency, not a marketplace

This is run by a small web agency. The person who records your audit is the person who does the fix, so you're not being routed to an anonymous bidder.

$199$349promo

The audit stands on its own

Plenty of people take the findings and do the work themselves, or hand them to their own developer. That is a fine outcome and nothing is bundled to stop it.

Book my audit

Fixed price, agreed up front

You approve a number before work starts. If the job turns out harder than we estimated, that's ours to absorb, not a change order.

Built with one of these? You're in the right place.

Lovable
Lovable projects usually break at the Supabase edge: environment variables that never reached production, or row-level security left open on a table that holds real customer data.
Bolt
Bolt ships fast and leaves the build config behind. The deploy fails on a missing package, a Node version, or an API key that only ever existed in the preview.
Replit
Replit apps run fine in the workspace and 500 on a real domain: ports, file paths and secrets that were never wired up for the deployed process.
Cursor
Cursor edits confidently across files it has not read. Two features end up disagreeing about the same state, and the bug moves every time you fix it.
v0
v0 gives you the interface, not the wiring. Forms post to nothing, server actions are still stubs, and auth is a component rather than a session.
Windsurf
Windsurf refactors reach further than intended. Imports, types and routes drift apart until the build stops on something unrelated to what you changed.
Base44
Base44 apps hit their ceiling at data and roles: the model that fit the demo cannot carry a second kind of user without redoing what sits underneath it.
Claude Code
Claude Code writes real code, which means real dependencies, migrations and tests. When it breaks, it breaks somewhere prompting cannot reach.

What it usually turns out to be

It works locally, then 500s once deployed
Nearly always an environment variable, a build step or a file path that only exists on your machine. The code is usually fine.
The AI keeps fixing the same bug
Each pass patches the symptom because the cause sits a layer down, in the data model or in how state is shared. Prompting harder does not reach it.
Forms submit but nothing arrives
The browser gets a success back while the server quietly fails. Without error handling and logs nobody finds out until a customer complains.
Logins drop or leak between users
Session and auth code copied from an example built for a different rendering model. It looks right in testing and breaks under real traffic.

And what nobody notices until later

Security is the part an AI builder is quietest about. None of these stop the app working, which is exactly why they ship.

The database is open to anyone with the URL
Supabase and Firebase hand the browser a key on purpose — the row policies are what actually guard the data. Generated projects routinely ship with those policies off, which turns a public key into a key to everything.
Secrets that shipped to the browser
A service key pasted into a component, or one prefixed NEXT_PUBLIC_ so the build would stop complaining. It is in the page source, readable in devtools, and the bill for it is yours.
Any logged-in user can read every other user's data
The endpoint takes an id and returns that record without ever asking whose it is. Nothing looks wrong while you are the only account; change the number in the URL and you are in someone else's.
Nothing stops the same request a thousand times over
No rate limit and no real validation on the public routes, so login, password reset and checkout can each be hammered until something gives. Generated code almost never adds this on its own.

If you recognised your own problem somewhere above, that is the point. The audit is where you find out which one it actually is.

Book my audit

$199$349promo

Send it over. We'll tell you what's wrong.

One fixed-price audit at $199 instead of $349. A video walkthrough, written findings and a firm quote on what it takes to fix.

Book my audit

Book my audit

$199. Fixed price, agreed up front.

Ask a question first

No payment and no obligation, just an answer.