AI coding tools ship vulnerabilities at machine speed: injection flaws, hardcoded secrets, stale dependencies. Clarista scans every build with three engines and blocks what shouldn't ship.
Every build gets checked automatically: code vulnerabilities (SAST), risky dependencies, exposed secrets, and data issues, quality, access, lineage, and personal data leaving your environment. Whatever an AI tool or agent produced, the same checks apply. Critical findings block the deploy.
Each engine covers a failure mode AI code generation is measurably prone to. Together they cover the attack surface a human reviewer skims past at 2,000 generated lines per hour.
200+ rulesets against injection, auth bypass, unsafe deserialization, path traversal. Tuned for the frameworks AI tools generate: React, FastAPI, Express, Next.js.
API keys, tokens, connection strings, private keys, in source, config, and history. AI tools love writing credentials into example files; GitLeaks catches them before your pentester does.
CVE scanning across dependencies and containers. AI-generated package.json files routinely pin versions with known vulnerabilities, every import gets checked.
Severity thresholds you set. Criticals block by default; accepted risks require an owner, a reason, and an expiry, all logged for audit.
Quality, access, and lineage scanning: schema validity, freshness, PII egress without basis, data residency, ungoverned shares. AI risk concentrates in data, not just code.
Code and changes produced by AI agents go through identical checks, no separate rules, no unscanned side door.
Every finding here feeds the same record as your compliance evidence, so fixing a vulnerability and proving it to an auditor is one motion. If your team builds with Lovable or Cursor, see how enterprise vibe coding keeps that speed safe.
This isn't a claim that AI code is bad. It's a claim that AI code is fast, and unreviewed speed is what security incidents are made of.
A developer with Cursor ships 10x the code. Your AppSec team didn't grow 10x. Manual review as the only gate stopped being realistic in 2025.
AI-generated code looks right. Hardcoded secrets in example configs, string-built SQL, permissive CORS, plausible code, exploitable patterns.
AI tools import packages the developer never chose. Each one is a supply-chain decision nobody consciously made, until it's scanned.
Vibe coding security is the practice of securing applications built with AI coding tools, scanning the generated code for vulnerabilities, detecting exposed secrets, checking dependencies for CVEs, and gating deployment on the results. It matters because AI tools generate plausible-looking code containing exploitable patterns at a speed manual review can't match.
Semgrep for static analysis (SAST), Trivy for dependency and container analysis (SCA), and GitLeaks for secret detection. All three run on every build automatically, no configuration, procurement, or CI wiring required.
Yes, that's the default. Critical findings stop the deploy until fixed or explicitly risk-accepted by a named owner with a reason and expiry date. Every decision is logged and exportable as audit evidence.
Two ways. First, coverage: CI scanning depends on every repo being wired correctly, forever; Clarista scans everything on the platform with no opt-out. Second, the results feed compliance evidence automatically, the scan and the audit artifact are the same motion.
Yes. Import via Git and the same pipeline applies regardless of which AI tool wrote the code.
Most first scans surface something the team didn't know shipped. Thirty minutes, your code, real results on screen.
Book a 30-minute architecture review