Prioritised findings
Only human-approved findings appear as report findings.
Source code review
Find and prioritise security weaknesses in your application code.
LAN10 AppSec Review analyses your application's source code at an exact commit using two separate AI security reviewers. Every candidate finding is assessed by a human reviewer before it reaches the final report.
Two separate AI reviews. Human-reviewed findings.
The review process
From repository to reviewed report
One run moves through four defined stages: the code is pinned to an exact commit, two AI security reviewers analyse it separately, overlapping findings are consolidated deterministically, and a human reviewer assesses every candidate before the report is approved.
Source code review walkthrough
57sReport preview
See the deliverable before you engage
A synthetic example of how a confirmed finding appears in the final report.
Security review report
Illustrative example - not a customer result
- Reviewed commit
- 7c49e2a
- Scope
- API authorisation module
- Coverage
- Complete
- Confirmed findings
- 4
- Dismissed candidates
- 3
Missing authorisation check on account export
High
- Severity
- High
- Location
- src/api/export.ts:84
- Decision
- Confirmed by human reviewer
- Reported by
- Reviewer A and Reviewer B
Evidence
The export handler verifies authentication but does not check that the requested account belongs to the authenticated tenant.
Remediation
Enforce tenant-scoped authorisation before generating or returning the export.
The deliverable
One report your engineering team can act on
The final report turns candidate findings in your application code into a reviewed, prioritised set of actions tied to the exact commit assessed. Confirmed findings retain their source locations, supporting evidence and remediation guidance, with coverage and limitations recorded so your team can judge what the assessment establishes.
Evidence and location
Each finding identifies the relevant code location and supporting evidence.
Final severity and rationale
The human reviewer records the final severity and the reason for the decision.
Remediation guidance
Each confirmed finding includes practical guidance for engineering teams.
Finding provenance
The report records which reviewer reported the issue and retains the underlying reviewer material.
Scope and coverage
The report states the commit reviewed, the coverage achieved and any limitations.
When to use it
For code that needs an outside security view
Use LAN10 AppSec Review when a security-sensitive release, customer review or internal assurance decision needs an outside view of the application code.
Before a major release
Review security-sensitive code before it reaches customers or enters a critical deployment stage.
An outside view
Give engineering and security leaders an outside assessment of a defined codebase.
Customer and technical reviews
Provide a traceable report tied to the exact version of code that was reviewed.
Accountability and traceability
Clear scope. Preserved evidence. Recorded decisions.
Exact-commit scope
The report identifies the precise commit reviewed.
Separate review streams
Neither AI reviewer receives the other reviewer's analysis.
Non-destructive consolidation
Overlapping findings are consolidated without discarding the original reviewer records.
Coverage disclosed
Partial or limited coverage is reported as such.
Ephemeral source handling. Source is cloned into a run container created for the review and removed when the run ends.
Read the confidentiality approachCommon questions
Get an outside view of your codebase
Tell us what you need reviewed and why. We will recommend an appropriate scope and provide a quote for the engagement.
Request a scoped reviewHuman-reviewed findings on every engagement