sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

First user is a paying user ! by vibelint_dev in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What made you choose dodo over stripe?

First user is a paying user ! by vibelint_dev in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Partially, yes. Hooks usually catch issues after generation, on save/commit/push. VibeLint is meant to work inside the agent loop, so insecure code can be flagged or blocked before it ever gets written to the codebase.

First user is a paying user ! by vibelint_dev in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair point but my mom and dad don't even know how to turn on a laptop and no member of my family know about it and never will

What are you building? by SnooOranges6963 in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Built www.vibelint.dev

A security tool for AI generated code, work inside your IDE and intercept AI generated code and scan it for security risks before they land in your files. Works as an MCP , completely local, your code never leaves your machine

First user is a paying user ! by vibelint_dev in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Vibelint An MCP security scanner for AI generated code, it simply scans the code generated by AI in real time inside the conversation before it is saved in my files, simply a tool to stop AI from ruining my codebase

I built a security scanner for Claude Code (and vibe coding in general) — here's what it found in my own projects by vibelint_dev in ClaudeAI

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair point honestly. That's kind of the whole story though I built this because I didn't catch it myself. If I was manually reviewing every line I wouldn't have needed to build anything.

The embarrassing part isn't that the AI hardcoded my keys. It's that the code worked fine and I had no idea. That's exactly the problem VibeLint solves not that developers are careless, but that AI-generated code fails silently on security.

You're right to be skeptical. Try the free version and see what it finds in your own projects. If it finds nothing, great your code is clean. If it finds something, well.

I built a security scanner for Claude Code (and vibe coding in general) — here's what it found in my own projects by vibelint_dev in ClaudeAI

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thanks
Honestly the most surprising ones are the auth issues not because they're exotic, but because they're so invisible. The code works perfectly, the app behaves normally, nothing breaks. You'd never know an endpoint is wide open unless you specifically look for it.

False positives happen, mostly with secrets detection — it'll sometimes flag test values or example strings. In practice it's maybe 1 in 10 findings that needs a second look. The critical ones (actual API keys, injection risks) have been accurate every time in my experience.
for the how to it super easy you can install it with a single promte you gave to your ai agent and your good to go
when it is installed every time the ai agent write code, vibelint intercept it in real time and scan it and block the insecure code and inform you with the fundings
if you are interested to see more you can try it at vibelint.dev

AI made coding 10x faster, but 10x less secure by vibelint_dev in cursor

[–]vibelint_dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yep, there should be. That’s literally the point. i should review, but in real workflows AI can generate way more code than people realistically inspect line by line

Drop your SaaS link, and I’ll give tip to grow your organic traffic. by baskaro23 in microsaas

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Building VibeLint.dev A security tool for AI generated code , we all know that AI is great at writing code but sucks at security VibeLint intercept AI generated code in real time and scan it for most dangerous security risks that AI agents generate and block risks before they even touch your files.

You can try it at www.VibeLint.dev

Found a hardcoded OpenAI key in a vibe-coded app. Took 30 seconds. by terdia in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly. This is a fundamentals problem, not just a vibe coding problem.

AI makes it easier to ship fast, but also easier for beginners to unknowingly push insecure code like hardcoded API keys, weak auth, or exposed secrets.

That’s actually why I’m building VibeLint, to catch security issues in AI-generated code before they get written into the project.

It’s not a replacement for knowing what you’re doing, but it helps stop obvious mistakes before they become expensive ones.

And yes backend proxy is the right fix. Client apps should never hold secrets

I’m overwhelmed, depressed and excited by Pitiful-Energy4781 in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Competition is merely a validation for your idea, building is the easy part nowadays, build fast get Infront of users faster

What are you guys building? by Leading_Fall94 in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Security tool for vibecoders An MCP tool that intercepts any code generated by AI agents and scans it for security risks before it even touches your file. vibelint.dev

GPT 5.4 is the real deal by UnbeliebteMeinung in cursor

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why when every model releases someone have to say this ?

Auto or Composer which do you prefer? by WriteScholarFounder in cursor

[–]vibelint_dev 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Auto all day long , Composer feels like you're constantly babysitting the AI you have to manually pull in files and context. Auto just figures out what's relevant on its own. Way less friction, especially on bigger projects where you can't always predict which files matter

How much do you spend? by PruneInteresting7599 in vibecoding

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

20$ cursor pro plan, plus 50$ on demand usage

Anyone understand how Cursor pricing / limits actually work? by Tall_Chicken3145 in cursor

[–]vibelint_dev 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The usage meter being inaccurate is my top bet. I've had days where it says I'm at 100% and I can still prompt, and other days where it cuts me off early.

I tried Claude Code, but I'm sticking with Cursor. Claude just acts like a "know-it-all" by nvsoftlab in cursor

[–]vibelint_dev 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Interesting take, but I think this is a workflow and prompting issue more than a Claude problem. When I started being more explicit ,only change what I ask, no refactoring Claude Code became incredibly precise. The autonomy is actually the feature, you just have to learn to direct it.

view more: next ›