Compliance & Security Code Audit

Common Security & Compliance Findings

The most frequent finding in AI-generated code: broken access control. API endpoints that don’t verify the requesting user has permission to access the data. A user changes the ID in the URL and accesses another user’s records. AI generates functional endpoints but rarely implements proper authorization checks beyond “is the user logged in.”

SQL injection and XSS vulnerabilities persist. AI generates code that concatenates user input into queries or renders unescaped user content. Modern frameworks mitigate some of these by default, but AI-generated raw SQL and unsafe HTML rendering calls bypass framework protections entirely. Every instance is a potential data breach.

Compliance gaps are structural, not cosmetic. Missing audit logging means you can’t prove who accessed what. No data retention policies mean you’re storing user data indefinitely without legal basis. Missing encryption at rest means a database breach exposes all data in plaintext. Each gap is both a security risk and a compliance failure.

Our Security & Compliance Audit

We combine automated scanning with manual review. Automated tools (Semgrep, Snyk, npm audit) catch known vulnerability patterns and outdated dependencies. Manual review catches business logic flaws, authorization bypasses, and architectural security issues that automated tools miss.

The compliance assessment maps your current controls against the target framework. For SOC2: access controls, change management, monitoring, incident response, and vendor management. For GDPR: data inventory, consent management, data subject rights, and privacy impact assessments. Each control is rated as implemented, partially implemented, or missing.

We prioritize findings by exploitability and business impact. A SQL injection in a public-facing endpoint is more urgent than a missing security header on an internal tool. Compliance gaps that block revenue (SOC2 for enterprise sales) are more urgent than nice-to-have improvements.

What Changes After the Audit

Critical vulnerabilities are identified with specific remediation code. The team knows exactly what to fix and how. Compliance gaps are documented with implementation requirements. The roadmap to SOC2, GDPR, or your target framework has a clear path with effort estimates for each control.

The security posture becomes intentional instead of accidental. Ongoing scanning catches new vulnerabilities as dependencies are updated. Security practices are documented and repeatable. The application moves from “we hope it’s secure” to “we can demonstrate it’s secure.”

We also establish a repeatable security baseline. This includes integrating SAST tools like Semgrep into your CI pipeline so every pull request is scanned before merge, configuring Dependabot or Renovate for automated dependency updates with vulnerability prioritization, and setting up Content Security Policy headers that prevent XSS without breaking application functionality. These automated guardrails catch regressions early, so the security posture you achieve from the audit doesn’t erode the moment new code is shipped.