The state of vibe-coded app security: my analysis of 549 self-described AI-generated repos (study + raw data)
The state of vibe-coded app security: my analysis of 549 self-described AI-generated repos (study + raw data) Source: https://ogbuilds.ai/studies/vibe-coded-security
The state of vibe-coded app security: my analysis of 549 self-described AI-generated repos (study + raw data)
Description
The state of vibe-coded app security: my analysis of 549 self-described AI-generated repos (study + raw data) Source: https://ogbuilds.ai/studies/vibe-coded-security
Reddit Discussion
I recently audited 549 public "vibecoded" repos (577 candidates, 28 excluded for size/availability), using a deterministic rules engine, no LLM in the analysis loop. Per-repo results published as anonymised JSONL so all figures are independently recomputable.
Interesting to me so thought I'd share.
Headline results (full corpus / substantive subset of repos with 15+ scannable files, n=467):
- Committed secrets: 20.4% / 23.3%
- >1 critical or high finding: 26.8% / 30.2%
- >1 critical finding: 14.9% (full corpus)
- Injection-category findings: 47.5% / 48.8%
- dangerouslySetInnerHTML usage: 42.6% / 43.0% (most common single finding)
- .gitignore missing .env: 35.7%
- Wildcard CORS: 11.3% · curl|sh install instructions: 9.8%
- Hardcoded passwords: 9.3%
Some observations: the finding classes are dominated by process gaps over vulnerability patterns. The rate of committed secrets correlate with the .gitignore issues. The injection and innerHTML classes are the standard sanitisation story. Nothing agent-specific in the remediation, only in the frequency.
Full report, methodology, and raw data: https://ogbuilds.ai/studies/vibe-coded-security
Disclosure: the rules engine is a scanner I built; the study and data carry no signup or paywall. Let me know what you think, happy to answer any questions!
Links cited in this discussion
Technical Details
- Source Type
- Subreddit
- netsec
- Reddit Score
- 0
- Discussion Level
- minimal
- Content Source
- reddit_link_post
- Post Type
- link
- Domain
- null
- Newsworthiness Assessment
- {"score":30,"reasons":["external_link","newsworthy_keywords:analysis","established_author","very_recent"],"isNewsworthy":true,"foundNewsworthy":["analysis"],"foundNonNewsworthy":[]}
- Has External Source
- true
- Trusted Domain
- false
Threat ID: 6a689b5f9c2644c7f8925d76
Added to database: 07/28/2026, 12:06:55 UTC
Last updated: 07/29/2026, 03:22:11 UTC
Views: 16
Community Reviews
0 reviewsCrowdsource mitigation strategies, share intel context, and vote on the most helpful responses. Sign in to add your voice and help keep defenders ahead.
Want to contribute mitigation steps or threat intel context? Sign in or create an account to join the community discussion.
Actions
Need more coverage?
Upgrade to Pro Console for AI refresh and higher limits.
For incident response and remediation, OffSeq services can help resolve threats faster.
Latest Threats
Check if your credentials are on the dark web
Instant breach scanning across billions of leaked records. Free tier available.