DevMeth vs a manual security audit
A professional pentest or manual code audit is thorough and worth money for serious, high-stakes apps. Our check is a different, much cheaper first pass — it is not a substitute for a pentest. Here's the honest comparison.
The honest picture
- A manual audit (often £297–$999+) is performed by a human security partner, digs deep, and finds novel, context-specific issues.
- We run 48 fixed, deterministic checks against known AI-code failure patterns — fast and cheap, but bounded by that checklist.
- Neither is a guarantee; a manual audit is simply a different (far more expensive) class of service.
Where we fit
- Checks checks the 48 known AI-code failure patterns — including your live surface — in about 2 minutes.
- Gives plain-English findings and paste-ready fix prompts, so an AI-built app gets fixed fast.
- One-time $59 report or $179 Launch Pack with re-scans until green — vs a multi-thousand-dollar retainer.
- A reasonable first pass before you decide whether a full pentest is worth it.
Side by side
| Dimension | Alternative | DevMeth |
|---|---|---|
| Price | £297–$999+ per engagement | $59 / $179 one-time, free scan |
| Time to first results | Days to weeks | ~2 minutes |
| Depth | Deep, novel, context-specific | Broad, fixed: 48 known patterns |
| What it can't do | — | It is not a pentest and makes no security guarantee |
| Best fit | High-stakes, compliance-sensitive apps | Vibe-coded and AI-built apps, fast |
Sources
DevMeth checks the 48 known AI-code failure patterns — not a penetration test or a security guarantee. This comparison notes where tools differ; it is not a claim that any tool is better at everything.
See where you stand
Run the free scan — 10 Critical checks, no signup — or read the pricing first.