Your AI wrote it. Nobody read it.
A person reads the code you shipped and works the running app, looking for the things generated code gets wrong. Not a scanner run and summarised, and not a model asked for a second opinion. You get the findings and the pull request that fixes them, from $250.
What Krytho does, and who does it
- A senior developer reads your codeAvailable nowDone by a person
Not a scanner run and summarised, and not a model asked for an opinion. Someone experienced reads the code you shipped and works the running app, looking for the things generated code gets wrong.
- Account takeover and auth logicAvailable nowDone by a person
Broken authentication is the flaw we find most and the one automated tools miss most, because it lives in logic rather than in a known-bad pattern. Both of our first two reviews found a critical one.
- The pull request that fixes itAvailable nowDone by a person
Findings come with the code that resolves them, opened as a PR against your repo. A machine drafts the change; the developer who found the problem checks it before it reaches you.
- Findings you can act onAvailable nowDone by a person
Each issue with its severity, how to reproduce it, and what it would cost you if someone found it first. No CVSS scores without context.
- Security Reviewed sealAvailable nowDone by a person
A badge that names the commit it covers and the date it was reviewed, linking to a page you do not control. It expires, and only another human review renews it.
- Drift and staleness alertsAvailable nowDone by software
Automated watching of the codebase a human reviewed, so you hear when your auth code changes or your seal is going stale. It reports; it never certifies.
- Continuous checks on every pushAvailable nowDone by software
Exposed secrets, vulnerable dependencies and dangerous patterns, checked on a schedule between reviews. Finds the known-bad shapes; a person is still what finds broken logic.
- AI-readiness reportAvailable nowDone by software
Whether the crawlers that feed AI answers can actually read your app: what robots.txt lets through, whether the page has content before JavaScript runs, and whether it says what it is.
- Supply chain verificationAvailable nowDone by software
Install scripts, git and non-registry sources, missing integrity hashes, and dependencies that were invented rather than published.
How a review works
- 01
You give us access
A repo, the URL it runs at, and written permission to test it. We prove you control the domain before any traffic is sent, because a signature from someone who does not own the target protects nobody.
- 02
Someone reads it
A senior developer goes through the code and works the running app. Broken authentication is what we find most, and it is what scanners miss most, because it lives in logic rather than in a known-bad pattern.
- 03
You get a PR, not a PDF
Findings arrive with the code that resolves them, opened against your repo. Review and merge. Then a seal that names the reviewed commit and the date.
- CriticalAccount takeoverAuth logic that lets one user end up holding another user's session.
- CriticalBroken access controlAn endpoint that checks you are signed in but never checks the record is yours.
- HighExposed secretsKeys that reached the client bundle, the repo history, or a log line.
- HighInjectionInput reaching a query, a shell, or a template without being separated from it.
- MediumDependency contaminationPackages the model invented, typosquats, and install scripts nobody read.
Severity shown is the rating each class usually carries, not a prediction about your app. Findings come with the fix, not just the diagnosis.
Frequently asked questions
A person reads your code and works the running app, then opens a pull request against your repo fixing what they found. You also get the findings written up with how to reproduce each one, and a seal naming the commit that was reviewed.