Probably not fully, and that is normal. AI builders write working code fast, but they routinely leave security gaps: exposed keys, open databases, weak logins. The app looks finished because it runs. Security is the part you cannot see, so it needs a deliberate check rather than a trust that it was handled.
Information current as at 5 July 2026
Your app works. People can sign up, data gets saved, the pages load. It feels done. But "it runs" and "it is safe" are two different claims, and the gap between them is exactly where trouble lives. This article is an honest look at where AI-built apps tend to be secure, where they tend not to be, and how to tell the difference for yours.
When an AI builder produces an app that works, it has proven one thing: the happy path functions. A user can do the intended action and get the intended result. That is genuinely useful, and it is most of what you can see. Security, by contrast, is almost entirely invisible from the outside. Whether your database is readable by strangers, whether your keys are exposed, whether one user can reach another user's data, none of that shows up when you click around as the owner. So a working app tells you the front door opens. It tells you nothing about whether the back door is locked, and the back door is where the risk sits.
It is worth being fair, because this is not about fear. Modern builders often get the basics of transport security right: they put your site on HTTPS, so traffic is encrypted in transit. They usually use established libraries for common tasks rather than inventing shaky ones. If you used a managed database service, its defaults are frequently reasonable. The generated code is often competent at the thing you asked for. The problem is rarely that the code is bad at its job. The problem is what the builder leaves for you to configure and never mentions, because it was optimising for a working demo, not a live business holding real people's data.
If you have made something and it needs to become real, send it over. We will tell you honestly what it needs to be live, safe and yours, whether that is a quick fix you can do or a proper build. No obligation.
The recurring gaps are a short list. Exposed secrets: API keys and database credentials left visible in the code, in the browser, or in logs. Open data access: a database where the access rules were never set, so in principle anyone who finds the address can read or change records. Weak or missing authentication: logins that do not really protect an account, or admin areas anyone can reach. Trusting the browser: assuming a check done in the visitor's browser cannot be bypassed, when it can. Technology press reporting (XDA Developers) has described vibe-coded apps routinely shipping with exposed data and API keys, which matches what tends to be found in practice. None of these are exotic. They are the same handful, over and over.
You do not need to pay anyone to get a first read on this. Open your app in a browser and look at the page source and the network requests for anything that looks like a key or a password; secrets should never appear there. Check your database service's dashboard for whether access rules or row-level security are switched on, or whether it is effectively open. Try to reach data or pages as a logged-out visitor that only a logged-in user should see. Ask yourself whether one ordinary user could view another user's records by changing a number in the address. Each of these is a real check you can do today. If several come back uncertain, that is a signal the app needs hardening before it carries anything sensitive, and it is a reasonable point to get a second opinion.
If you have made something and it needs to become real, send it over. We will tell you honestly what it needs to be live, safe and yours, whether that is a quick fix you can do or a proper build. No obligation.
Whether you can name exactly what you want built, or you just know something is leaking, the next step is the same conversation.