A

Vibe-Code Security Auto-Scanner

4.20

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Mass security vulnerability exposure in vibe-coded apps
→
Step 2 Vibe-coded output security scanner
→
Step 3 Automated security vulnerability scanning SaaS for non-developers

Problem

Non-developer founders building apps with vibe-coding platforms like Lovable and Bolt are deploying with basic authentication/authorization flaws, hardcoded API keys, SQL injection vulnerabilities, and other issues—without even realizing it—leading to mass exposure of user data. Recently, 18,000 individuals' personal information was leaked from a single app. Non-developers cannot afford security audits ($2,250–$3,750 per engagement) and typically leave vulnerabilities unaddressed.

Solution

Users simply enter the deployment URL from their vibe-coding platform (Lovable, Bolt, v0, etc.) and the service performs an automated scan based on the OWASP Top 10, generating an easy-to-understand report with traffic-light risk indicators and one-click remediation guides. Weekly automated rescans with Slack/KakaoTalk notifications provide continuous monitoring.

Target: Solo Entrepreneur non-developers (ages 25–40) who built MVPs with vibe-coding, no-code/low-code agencies (1–5 employees)
Revenue Model: SaaS Monthly Subscription: Free (1 scan/month) / Starter $22/month (weekly scans, 3 apps) / Pro $60/month (daily scans, unlimited apps, remediation guides included)
Ecosystem Role: Infrastructure
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
5.0/5
M Market
4.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (67%)

Tech Complexity
29.3/40
Data Availability
17.5/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (63/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
18.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
13.5/15
Solo Buildability
7.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Backend [medium] Frontend [low] AI/ML [medium]
Dashboard