AmuraAMURA Software
AI code audit · By tool

Audit your Claude Code codebase.

Claude Code ships features fast. The same pattern that makes that possible — confident code, idiomatic-looking output, fast iteration — is what hides the risk we read for. We audit Claude Code codebases line by line, name what's broken, and tell you what to fix first.

All AI code audits
Why this audit

What Claude Code typically ships.

Terminal-driven, multi-file changes across a codebase — often touching infra, tests and product code in a single agent loop.

  • Agent loops produce silent multi-file changes that pass cursory review because each diff looks reasonable on its own
  • The terminal context makes developers more trusting — local-only assumptions leak into production code paths
  • Lockfile churn from unattended npm installs introduces transitive dependencies nobody chose
  • Prompt-to-database shortcuts suggested for ‘convenience’ end up in production
What we find

Patterns we see in Claude Code projects.

These are anonymized findings from recent audits. The same patterns repeat across Claude Code codebases — the names change, the bugs don't.
Highsecrets

.env file committed with live credentials

The repository contains a .env file with database URLs, API keys or third-party secrets that resolve to live, billable services. Even if the repo is private today, anyone who later forks it, clones it for onboarding or browses old commits gets a working set of keys.

Highsecrets

API keys hardcoded as string literals in source files

OpenAI, Stripe or third-party API keys appear directly inside .ts or .py files instead of being read from environment variables. Once committed, the key lives in git history forever — rotating it doesn't undo the leak, and grep-style scanners on public mirrors will find it within hours.

Highdata

User input concatenated into LLM-generated SQL

A feature that lets users ask questions in natural language pipes the raw text into a prompt that asks an LLM to write SQL, and then executes that SQL with elevated database privileges. A user who types the right paragraph can read or drop tables they never had UI access to.

Mediumsupply-chain

Hallucinated or typosquatted dependency installed

The AI suggested an import for a package that either doesn't exist on npm or matches a malicious typosquat of a real one (`reqeusts`, `loadash`, `node-fetchh`). When `npm install` succeeded, it pulled either nothing useful or someone's installed-package backdoor — and now lives in the lockfile.

Mediumdata

Personal data written to application logs

Email addresses, phone numbers, full names or session tokens appear in `console.log` statements that survive the build. In production those lines stream into the hosting platform's log viewer, get retained for weeks, and end up readable by any teammate with platform access — outside the scope of any GDPR data-processing record.

How the audit works

Tuned for Claude Code stacks.

Knowing the tool that built the code lets us focus the audit. We start by detecting the Claude Code signature in the codebase, then we read the surfaces where Claude Code-specific failure modes cluster: auth, secrets, data access, dependencies and LLM-touching paths. Five to ten business days from kickoff to written report. No deployment access required — read-only repository access is enough.

What you get

Same five deliverables as the hub audit.

Written report (PDF)

Severity-ordered findings with file paths, line references, why it matters and a fix sketch. Readable by both engineering and non-technical stakeholders.

Loom walkthrough

15-minute recording of the report — for the cofounder, investor or director who didn't make the live call.

60-minute review call

Live discussion of severity, fix order and the calls that need a human in the loop.

30-day follow-up window

Slack or email for clarifications, fix reviews and a second pair of eyes on the patches.

Turnaround: 5–10 business days

Typical SMB AI-built codebase, kickoff to written report. Larger or multi-repo audits scoped separately.

Frequently asked

Tool-specific questions.

How do you audit a codebase that was built with terminal-driven AI?

+

Same way as any other AI-built codebase. The terminal context just means the developer trusted more — so we trust less. We pay extra attention to local-only assumptions, debug paths and config files that were generated for development convenience and forgotten.

We let Claude Code make multi-file changes. Is that a problem?

+

Not inherently. The risk is when those changes cross security boundaries (auth + database + storage in one commit) and the diff is too large to review carefully. We flag those commits and re-read what changed.

Will you find bugs Claude Code already reviewed?

+

Yes. The model's review pass is good for most things, but it has blind spots — its own suggestions in a different file, its own confident SQL, its own auth assumptions. An external read catches what a self-review can't.

Trust

Safe, traceable AI,
enterprise-ready.

We design for privacy from the start, human control, traceability, usage limits, permissioning and documentation. For sensitive processes, we help assess risk and applicable obligations under GDPR and the EU AI Act.

  • 01We never train models on your data without explicit authorization.
  • 02Human review built-in for processes where risk demands it.
  • 03Traceability: prompts, sources, permissions, errors and metrics — documented.
  • 04Privacy, security and control integrated from day one.
  • 05Solutions engineered to be maintained, audited and improved over time.
GDPREU AI ActAEPDISO 27001 readyEU data residency
Personal diagnosis

We work with
few clients.

Every engagement is led personally by one of the partners. If there's a fit, you get a personal first read of your case within one business day — not a canned demo.

How we work
  1. 01Tell us which process eats your time
  2. 02Personal reply within one business day
  3. 0320-minute call — no demo, no pitch
Start the conversation →