Need help? Email mohsindev369@gmail.com
For apps built with Lovable, Bolt, Cursor, Replit and v0
AI builders get you to a working demo fast, then quietly skip the parts that matter once people pay you: who can see what data, where your keys live, what happens when something fails. I find those gaps, fix them, and then help you build what comes next.
Short answer: start with a fixed-price $750 Production Audit. In 3 working days you get a written report of every security, reliability and scaling issue, ranked by risk, with a fixed quote to fix each one. The fee is credited if you go ahead.
Async and in writing, no calls. 4.98★ across 151 client orders.
If two or more of these are true, your app needs an audit before it needs more features.
These aren't edge cases. They're the default output of tools built to make a demo work.
API keys and service credentials shipped to the browser, where anyone can copy them and run up your bill.
Database tables without row-level security, so one logged-in user can read or edit another user's data.
No tests, no error tracking, no backups. You find out something broke when a customer emails you.
Duplicated logic across files, so fixing one bug means finding the four other copies of it.
Start small with the audit. Everything after it is quoted in writing before any work starts.
$750
3 working days
Fee credited in full if you go ahead with the rescue
Fixed quote after audit
Usually 1 to 3 weeks
Scope agreed in writing before work starts
Fixed quote per milestone
Ongoing or per milestone
Same engineer who audited your code
All in writing, so every finding, decision and price is on record.
Pay the fixed fee, then send read-only access to your repo and a short note on what the app does and who uses it.
No calls. You write, I read.
Every issue I find, ranked by how much damage it could do, with a plain-English explanation and a fixed price to fix it.
Yours to keep, even if you hire someone else.
Pick the fixes you want. The audit fee comes off the rescue quote, so the audit is free if we keep working together.
Nothing starts until you approve it in writing.
Critical issues first, then the rest. Every change goes through review and a staging link before it touches production.
You own all code and accounts throughout.
I've been shipping production web and mobile apps for 7 years, including a multi-restaurant marketplace app a client came back to extend in a second phase. I use AI tools every day, so I know exactly where they cut corners. You get one person who reads your whole codebase, not a rotating team.
It wrote the bugs, and it can't see what it doesn't know is missing. AI tools optimise for a demo that works, so they skip access rules, rate limits, backups and tests. Veracode's 2025 study found 45% of AI-generated code samples introduced OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities, and newer models did no better than older ones.
Sometimes. That's part of what the audit tells you. If a rebuild is the cheaper path, the report says so and explains why. Most apps I'd rather rescue, because your users, data and working features are worth keeping.
Apps from Lovable, Bolt, Cursor, Replit, v0 and Claude Code, mostly React or Next.js with Supabase, Firebase or a Node backend, plus React Native mobile apps. If you're unsure, send the repo link and I'll tell you before you pay.
Yes. I'll leave the codebase in a shape where AI tools do less damage: clear structure, tests that catch regressions, and notes on which parts to be careful with.
No. You own the code, the accounts and the audit report. I use standard, well-documented tools so any competent developer can pick up after me.
That's the best time to do this, and the riskiest time not to. Fixes go through staging first and are released in small steps, so your users keep working while it gets safer.
Everything happens in writing, so every decision, scope change and price is on record for both of us. You can reply when it suits you, and nothing gets lost in a meeting nobody wrote down.