Hacker News Reader

Comment by brabel | Hacker News Reader

Is there evidence serious vulnerabilities are the result of vibe coding already? I haven’t seen any so if you have some references, please share.

View on HN

Security researcher Dor Zvi and his team at the cybersecurity firm he cofounded, RedAccess, analyzed thousands of vibe-coded web applications created using the AI software development tools Lovable, Replit, Base44, and Netlify and found more than 5,000 of them that had virtually no security or authentication of any kind. Many of these web apps allowed anyone who merely finds their web URL to access the apps and their data. Others had only trivial barriers to that access, such as requiring that a visitor sign in with any email address. Around 40 percent of the apps exposed sensitive data, Zvi says, including medical information, financial data, corporate presentations, and strategy documents, as well as detailed logs of customer conversations with chatbots.

https://www.wired.com/story/thousands-of-vibe-coded-apps-exp...

That’s quite different. Vibe coded apps are not normally even meant to be secure, it’s meant to be used by the creator only. Bad app security is not the same as a vulnerability. A vulnerability would be a library providing some functionality it claims is secure, but in reality it’s not.

These are very clearly vulnerabilities in the normal sense of the word, and if a security bug means that an app that was supposed to be only accessible to the creator is open to the world that's still quite bad (though the blast radius is small).

If you limit to vulnerabilities that get CVEs, however, https://vibe-radar-ten.vercel.app has 34 in March alone including https://www.sentinelone.com/vulnerability-database/cve-2025-...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com