Before real users, real data and real money hit your app—know what’s actually ready.

A scoped, independent check of the paths that matter most before real users, customer data and payments reach your app. Nine founder-risk areas are considered — account abuse, permissions and data boundaries, public attack surface, payments and reconciliation, realtime state, scheduled jobs, secrets, failure visibility, and founder ownership — and the applicable critical paths are agreed in writing beforehand. It ends in a GO, CONDITIONAL GO or NO-GO verdict with evidence attached to each finding.

No. A penetration test is an adversarial engagement, usually scoped to exploit whatever it can and often required for compliance. This is a fixed-scope review of critical launch paths, done with your authorization and read-only access, aimed at a launch decision. If you need a formal pen test or a compliance certification, you need a different provider.

Yes. BuildVetted reviews founder-led apps built with Lovable, Replit, Emergent and similar tools, provided the app is deployed and the agreed paths can be safely reviewed.

Yes. You need to own the app or hold written authorization to have it reviewed, and you need to be able to grant the access described in the scope. The review is independent of whoever built it: the report is written so your existing developer can act on it, not to argue that they should be replaced.

Not always. Much of the review runs against the deployed application with controlled test accounts. Repository access, configuration and provider dashboards make findings faster and more precise, and some areas cannot be checked without them. Anything that cannot be checked with the access provided is reported as NOT VERIFIED rather than assumed to be fine.

The 48-hour review window starts after payment, written authorization, agreed scope and complete usable access are all in place. If access breaks or evidence becomes unavailable mid-review, the clock pauses and the blocker is documented.

GO means nothing found blocks launch on the paths reviewed. CONDITIONAL GO means you can launch once specific named items are fixed, and those items are listed. NO-GO means at least one finding would cause loss of money, data or customer trust on the paths reviewed. The verdict covers what was reviewed with the evidence available — it is not a statement about the whole system.

No, and any provider who tells you otherwise is selling you something. A review reflects the evidence available in an agreed window on an agreed scope. It reduces the risk of launching blind; it does not certify that every vulnerability, bug or fraud path has been found. Findings are labelled by how strongly they are evidenced so you can judge for yourself.

No. I do not implement findings on apps I review. That separation keeps the verdict independent — reviewing the work and selling the fix creates an incentive to find more. Your current developer or another provider can use the developer-ready remediation notes, and the included recheck confirms whether the agreed P0/P1 findings were resolved.

No. Nine founder-risk areas are considered, and the critical paths applicable to your app are agreed in writing before the review begins. Which paths those are depends on how your app handles accounts, customer data, payments, integrations and production operations. Anything outside the agreed scope is labelled OUT OF SCOPE in the report so nothing looks silently skipped.

You revoke the access you granted as soon as the report is delivered, and are prompted to. Project material is used only to deliver and administer the review. Client names, screenshots and identifying details are never published without separate written permission — buying a review does not imply it.