Engineering-grade code audit — not a scanner report

Every finding ships with the exact file path, line number, and a specific fix.

Security, performance, architecture, code quality, and accessibility — reviewed by engineers, not automated scanners. Written report in 5 business days. Fixed price from $1,200.

Preview the ReportRequest My Audit
5 days
full written report
$1,200 – $5,800
fixed price, no hourly billing
Read-only
no production access needed
Engineers at a long table reviewing a printed code audit report beside a laptop showing a SonarQube dashboard with a green passing quality gate, natural window light
Why "we reviewed your code" is not enough

A pull request comment is not an audit.

Most "code reviews" hand you vague categories: "improve the database layer," "add more tests," "security looks fine." A Redefine code audit hands you the exact file path, the line number, the severity rating, and a specific fix. Your engineers open the report and know what to work on first.

Generic code review
  • "Consider refactoring the auth module"
  • "Performance could be improved"
  • "Add input validation somewhere"
  • No severity ratings or prioritization
  • No remediation guidance included
What you get from Redefine
  • src/auth/login.controller.ts:47 — SQL injection (Critical)
  • services/ProductService.php:234 — N+1 query on checkout (High)
  • api/checkout.ts:89 — missing CSRF token (High)
  • Business-impact prioritization matrix included
  • Code-level fix recommendation per finding
See what lands in your inbox

This is what your audit report looks like.

Every finding includes the exact file path, line number, severity rating, and a specific fix your team can implement. Tap any finding to expand the detail. The full report also includes a 60-minute walkthrough call where we explain every critical item in plain language.

Redefine Code Audit Report · acme-corp/api
Unsanitized user input in login query
src/auth/login.controller.ts:47
Critical
Raw request body concatenated into SQL string. Exploitable via POST /api/login with crafted email parameter.
Fix: Use parameterized queries via your ORM prepared statement API.
Hardcoded API key in source
config/secrets.js:12
High
Production Stripe secret committed to repository history. Key visible to any collaborator with read access.
Fix: Rotate key immediately. Move to environment variables and add to .gitignore.
Missing CSRF protection on checkout
api/checkout.ts:89
High
State-changing POST endpoint accepts requests without CSRF token validation.
Fix: Add CSRF middleware using double-submit cookie pattern.
N+1 query in product catalog
services/ProductService.php:234
High
Loop loads related variants with individual queries. Runs 800K+ queries/month on checkout path.
Fix: Eager-load variants with single JOIN or batch query.
Unbounded Redis cache keys
lib/cache/redis.ts:18
Medium
Cache keys never expire. Memory grows unbounded under load.
Fix: Set TTL of 3600s on product cache keys.
Missing index on orders.user_id
db/migrations/2024_orders.sql
High
Full table scan on every user order lookup. P95 latency 2.3s at 50K orders.
Fix: Add composite index on (user_id, created_at DESC).
Circular module dependency
modules/payment/index.ts ↔ modules/billing/index.ts
High
Payment imports billing for invoice generation; billing imports payment for charge capture. Blocks independent deployment.
Fix: Extract shared invoice interface to modules/shared/invoicing.
God class: UserManager
src/UserManager.java:1
Medium
1,847 lines handling auth, profile, billing, and notifications. 14 direct database dependencies.
Fix: Split into AuthService, ProfileService, BillingService.
No API versioning strategy
api/routes.ts:1
Medium
Breaking changes deployed without version prefix. Mobile clients on v1 break silently.
Fix: Introduce /v1/ prefix and deprecation policy.
Zero test coverage on payment capture
payments/capture.ts:1
High
Critical revenue path has no unit or integration tests. Last manual test was 8 months ago.
Fix: Add integration test suite covering success, decline, and timeout paths.
Duplicated email validation
controllers/UserController.ts:34, OrderController.ts:67, AuthController.ts:12, CheckoutController.ts:89
Medium
Same regex copied in 4 controllers. Diverged in two files.
Fix: Extract to shared validators/email.ts.
Dead code: legacy import path
legacy/import_v1/
Low
1,200 lines unreachable from any route. Last referenced in commit 14 months ago.
Fix: Delete directory after confirming no runtime references.
Form inputs without associated labels
templates/cart.html:142
High
Quantity and promo code inputs lack label or aria-label. Screen reader users cannot identify fields.
Fix: Add visible labels or aria-label attributes.
Missing alt text on product images
components/ProductCard.vue:28
Medium
47 product image instances use empty alt attribute on checkout flow.
Fix: Add descriptive alt text from product.name field.
CTA button fails contrast ratio
styles/checkout.css:201
Medium
Primary checkout button: 2.8:1 contrast on hover state. Fails WCAG AA (requires 4.5:1).
Fix: Darken hover background to #005bb5 for 4.6:1 ratio.
Corporate Gear — B2B ecommerce case study

A single structured audit put Corporate Gear on a path to $45M+ in annual revenue.

Before the audit, Corporate Gear's team made site changes without knowing which problems to fix first. The audit gave them a prioritized list. They ran A/B tests on every friction point the audit identified. The result: top-1% market position in B2B corporate branding.

Developer working calmly at a desk with VS Code showing an all-tests-passed green terminal run after the code audit, warm desk-lamp light and gentle screen glow, back-angle profile
Developer presenting code audit findings on a large monitor showing a GitHub pull request review with inline comments and an approved all-checks-passed status, morning office light
CTO and engineering lead reviewing a printed code audit report at a conference table beside a laptop showing a SonarQube overview with a passed quality gate, morning meeting-room light
Annual revenue achieved
$0M+
after the audit gave teams a prioritization framework
A/B + multivariate
A/B
testing run on every audit-identified friction point
Top 1%
Top 1%
B2B corporate branding ecommerce — market position
Client

Corporate Gear

Business-to-Business Ecommerce · Corporate Branding

User Experience AuditConversion Rate OptimizationA/B Testing

Corporate Gear sells branded corporate apparel and merchandise to enterprise buyers. They needed to know which parts of their site were blocking conversions — and in what order to fix them.

The Problem

The team was making changes but had no way to know which changes would move the needle. There was no framework for prioritization. Fixes were guesses. Measurement was inconsistent.

No prioritization framework meant no traction. Every sprint delivered work, but no one could trace that work to revenue.

The Result
$45M+

$45M+ in annual revenue followed the audit. The audit's prioritization matrix guided which friction points to test first. A/B testing confirmed which changes drove conversions. Personalization built on that data extended the gains.

  • Conversion rates, traffic, and lead volume all increased following structured testing
  • Repeat purchase rate improved as personalization aligned site experience with buyer behavior
Three gaps every generic code review leaves open

Three things generic code reviews miss.

01 · File precision
Specific file. Specific line. Not "improve your database layer."
Generic audits name categories of concern but not locations. This report names the exact file, the exact line number, and the exact function that is broken. Your developer opens the finding and knows what to fix, without a follow-up conversation.
02 · Business context
Every finding is prioritized by business impact, not technical severity alone.
A SQL injection in a low-traffic admin endpoint matters less than a performance problem on your checkout page. The prioritization matrix scores each finding on three factors: estimated fix effort, the potential damage if it is exploited, and its direct effect on revenue or conversion rate. You fix the right things first.
03 · Fix included
Each finding ships with a specific code-level recommendation, not a suggestion to "research options."
Every finding includes a recommended approach: a code snippet, a specific library, or a pattern with a rationale. Your team does not need another meeting to figure out how to address what the audit found. The fix is in the report.
Questions that clear before you commit

What engineering teams ask before buying a code audit.

The most common questions about turnaround, access, fixes, and pricing. Direct answers, no sales language.

Pricing summary

Starter — $1,200 · up to 25,000 lines of code
Standard — $2,800 · 25,000 to 100,000 lines of code
Enterprise — $5,800 · 100,000+ lines of code or M&A due diligence

Fixed price. Report in 5 business days. Walkthrough call included. No hourly billing.

Read-only access to your repository is sufficient. We do not need write access, deployment credentials, or access to production systems. You can create a dedicated read-only deploy key or add a temporary collaborator with read permissions. We will provide the exact instructions for GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket. If you have a non-disclosure agreement requirement, we sign before access is granted.
After the walkthrough call, we can scope a remediation engagement based on the audit's prioritization matrix. The audit cost applies toward the remediation fee. There is no obligation to continue. The report is yours to take to any team. Many clients hand the report to an internal team or freelancer. Others bring us in for the fixes. Both work.
A penetration test simulates an outside attacker. A code audit reads the source code directly to find vulnerabilities before they are exploited. The audit finds the same SQL injection and authentication flaws a penetration test would surface, plus code quality, architecture, and performance problems a penetration test cannot reach. They work best in sequence: audit first to find and fix problems, then penetration test to confirm the fixes held.
Node.js, Python, PHP (including Laravel and Symfony), Ruby on Rails, .NET, Java (Spring), React, Vue, Angular, and Next.js. We have also audited Go and Rust services for architecture and security categories. If your primary stack is not listed, submit the brief and we will confirm before you pay. We do not take an audit we cannot deliver at full depth.
Yes. The Enterprise tier is built for this. The audit produces an objective written assessment of technical debt severity, security posture, and maintainability — formatted to accompany merger and acquisition documentation. We can add a signed attestation letter if your legal team requires it. The Enterprise audit includes a second call specifically for investor or acquirer questions.
Is a code audit the right move right now?

Five situations where a code audit delivers. Two where it does not.

We turn down projects that are not the right fit. Check your situation below before reaching out.

Match score0 of 6 matched

Cards auto-select as you scroll — tap to adjust your score

You're preparing for a funding round or acquisition and need an independent technical report

Investors and acquirers ask for this by name. An independent audit gives them a credible, third-party assessment to rely on — and gives you a document you control.

Your app is slow or breaking and you don't know the root cause

The audit tells you exactly what is slow, where in the code, and why. You stop guessing and start fixing.

A new dev team or agency is coming in and you need an honest read of the codebase first

A pre-engagement audit gives the incoming team a clear picture of what they are inheriting. No surprises on day one.

Security is a concern but no one has done a systematic review of your application code

The audit covers the OWASP Top 10 and common application vulnerabilities. Every finding comes with a file path and a specific fix, not a category on a checklist.

Not the right fit:

Your codebase is under 2 weeks old and you have not shipped yet

Technical debt needs time to build up. Early-stage codebases benefit more from architecture consulting than from an audit. We can point you in the right direction.

You need a test suite written, not just identified as missing

The audit alone does not fix what it finds. It tells you exactly which tests are missing and where. The remediation engagement writes them. Those are two separate services.

Start your audit

Tell us about your codebase. Your report is in your inbox in 5 business days.

No commitment. No pitch. Tell us your language, framework, approximate size, and what prompted the audit. We confirm your tier and price in writing before we start.

Your team's total time investment: under 2 hours. That covers granting read-only repository access and attending the 60-minute findings walkthrough.

01

Submit your brief and repository URL

Language, framework, approximate size, and your main concern — performance, security, pre-acquisition, or pre-launch migration.

02

Tier and price confirmed in writing within 24 hours

You approve the scope and price before a single line of your code is read.

03

Audit begins within 48 hours of your sign-off

Read-only access only. No production credentials, no write access, no deployment permissions needed.

04

Full written report and walkthrough call in 5 business days

60-minute call where we walk through every critical finding. PDF report and prioritization matrix included.

Form
24 hours
Tier confirmed in writing
5 days
Full written report
142+
Audits completed
60 min
Included walkthrough call

Get on a call with us to see how we can help you

Get a Quote