VELOCITY
Security moves upstream of the PR.
Your reviewers stop catching OWASP findings on diffs that should have been clean. The agent gets the rules at prompt time. The PR arrives shippable.
FOR ENGINEERING TEAMS
Your team writes prompts. VibeReview matches each one against your repo's threat model and lets the agent produce the secure version. PRs come in clean. Reviewers spend their time on logic, not on parameterized queries.
14-day free trial · No card required
"Add an endpoint to fetch user orders by ID."
@app.get("/orders/{order_id}")
def get_order(
order_id: int,
user = Depends(auth),
):
return db.execute(
"SELECT * FROM orders "
"WHERE id = ? AND user_id = ?",
(order_id, user.id),
) ✓ Built secure on the first prompt — no review needed.
VELOCITY
Your reviewers stop catching OWASP findings on diffs that should have been clean. The agent gets the rules at prompt time. The PR arrives shippable.
POSTURE
Designers using Lovable. PMs using Cursor. Senior engineers using Claude Code. Each prompt runs against the same threat-informed guardrails, regardless of who's typing.
EVIDENCE
Per-repo audit trails of guardrail enforcement. Mapping reports to OWASP, ISO, and SOC 2. Your security partner gets answers without scheduling a meeting.
DAY 1
Install the GitHub App or GitLab App. Authorize read-only access on the repos you want covered. Threat models run within minutes.
DAY 3
One command installs the MCP server. Cursor, Claude Code, Copilot, Codex pick it up. Every prompt from every engineer routes through the matching guardrails.
DAY 14
Security comments collapse onto the prompt step. Review focuses on product logic. Throughput rises without a head count change.
ENGINEERING LEADERSHIP QUESTIONS
Yes, on Team and above. Add them in the dashboard or via the vibereview-kit CLI; they'll show up in your IDE on the next sync.
Yes — and that's the point. A February 2026 analysis of the r/vibecoding community (153K members) found 63% of active vibe coders aren't developers: PMs, designers, founders, marketers, ops. Brian Armstrong said about 40% of Coinbase's daily code is AI-generated and that non-technical teams are shipping production code. The threat surface used to be "your engineers' commits." Now it's "anyone with a Cursor seat." Reactive tools (SAST queues, PR scanners) react after the fact — by then the AI-generated insecure code is already merged. VibeReview makes every prompt threat-informed before the code is even written, regardless of who's prompting.
We threat-model your repo first. We read it for entry points, trust boundaries, where user input lands, where secrets live, and the moves an AI coding agent is most likely to mis-handle. The code profile — languages, frameworks, drivers, CI — is built against that threat model: stack facts in service of the threats they introduce. Guardrails are then generated as direct responses to each threat, mapped onto the OWASP Top 10 and Cisco AI Security Taxonomy. Nothing in the rule set is generic. Every rule traces back to a real threat your repo has.
Different layer. SCA flags known CVEs in your package manifest. VibeReview flags hazards in the code your team — or your AI — just wrote, against a threat model of your repo: SQL string interpolation on a user-input path, secret logging, missing webhook signature checks, tool-output trust in MCP clients. Run both.
No. VibeReview catches security regressions at write-time, inside the IDE, against a threat model of your repo — so they rarely reach the PR. When something does land, we comment only on the diff lines that crossed a guardrail, with the rule name and a one-line mitigation. Your humans focus on architecture, naming, and intent. Diff-aware, not 40-comment storms.
We help your team connect repos, install MCP, and ship the first ten guardrail-enforced PRs.