Skip to main content
Developer Security

Developer Security for AI Applications

Security checks where AI is built — across source code, tenant boundaries, and model I/O. Produce deterministic technical evidence developers can use in the IDE, CI pipeline, security review, and HAIEC assurance workflows.

Layer by Layer

Each layer addresses a different security problem, runs in a different place, and produces different evidence.

SOURCE

AI AppSec

View product page

Security problem

AI applications and agents have source-code-level security risks: unsafe tool execution, secrets exposure, prompt injection in code paths, and RAG/model integration gaps. These must be caught before commit or merge.

What is checked

Audit AI application and agent source code before commit, push, merge, or deployment — with explicit coverage, reproducible findings, and tamper-evident security evidence. Uses Semgrep 1.173.0 as its execution engine with a bundled Public Core rulepack.

122 detectors79 security checks

Where it runs

Semgrep 1.173.0 (external engine) with bundled Public Core rulepack. Static analysis only — does not execute target code.

Evidence / output produced

  • Scan Receipt (SHA-256 digests for finding set, concern families, coverage, evaluated checks)
  • Evidence Envelope (binds receipt to execution context, producer identity, target identity)
  • Proof-of-fix comparison (STILL_PRESENT, NEW, NOT_VERIFIABLE)
  • Coverage accounting (DISCOVERED, INTENTIONALLY_EXCLUDED, UNSUPPORTED, TARGETED, ENGINE_REPORTED_SCANNED, PARSE_FAILED, SUCCESSFULLY_ANALYZED)

Install

$ npm install -g ai-appsec

AI IDE / MCP

MCP identifier: io.github.subodhkc/ai-appsec · Transport: stdio

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "ai-appsec": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "ai-appsec"]
    }
  }
}

Limitations

  • Static analysis only — no runtime behavioral evidence
  • No compliance certification or assessment
  • No tenant isolation checking (roadmap)
  • No LLM content verification (roadmap)
  • + 4 more — see product page
BOUNDARY

MCP Tenant Isolation

View product page

Security problem

Multi-tenant SaaS and MCP servers can leak data across tenants when queries, cache keys, file access, API responses, or MCP tool visibility are not properly scoped to the authenticated tenant.

What is checked

Detect cross-tenant security gaps across queries, APIs, caches, files, credentials, sessions, vector stores, and MCP tools before they become production data leaks. 57 deterministic rules covering tenant isolation, tool visibility, cache key scoping, RLS, IDOR, and credential vault isolation.

57 deterministic rules

Where it runs

Babel AST parser for TypeScript/JavaScript. Dedicated Prisma schema parser. SQL migration parser for RLS detection. MCP SDK import detection. IR and Flow Graph with intra-procedural taint tracking.

Evidence / output produced

  • Scan Receipt (SHA-256 hash, rulepack digest, timestamp)
  • Evidence Envelope for verifiable scan artifacts
  • v2 semantic fingerprints (stable under line movement)
  • Proof-of-fix tracking (STILL_PRESENT, NEW, NOT_VERIFIABLE)

Install

$ npm install -g mcp-tenant-isolation

AI IDE / MCP

MCP identifier: io.github.subodhkc/mcp-tenant-isolation · Transport: stdio

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "tenant-isolation": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "mcp-tenant-isolation", "mcp"]
    }
  }
}

Limitations

  • Intra-procedural flow analysis only — does not trace across function calls, files, or middleware boundaries
  • No runtime verification — cannot verify database-level RLS enforcement or middleware execution
  • TypeScript and JavaScript only — Python, Go, Ruby not supported yet
  • False positives are possible — pattern-based detection with FP filtering
  • + 1 more — see product page
RUNTIME I/O

LLMVerify

View product page

Security problem

LLMs hallucinate facts, leak PII in responses, follow prompt injections buried in user input, and drift in quality. You need a guardrail between the model output and your users.

What is checked

A safety layer that sits between your LLM and your users. Deterministic, pattern-based engines run locally — no model calls, no network on the free tier. Same input plus same rules equals same result. Every result carries an explicit limitations array stating what was and was not checked.

Where it runs

Deterministic, pattern-based engines running locally. No model calls, no network on free tier. Free tier limit: 500 verification calls/day (tracked locally).

Evidence / output produced

  • Risk level and findings per verification
  • Explicit limitations array per result
  • Hash-only audit log entries (SOC 2 / HIPAA / GDPR evidence)
  • Runtime monitoring metrics (latency, token drift, behavioral changes)

Install

$ npm install llmverify

Limitations

  • Cannot definitively prove hallucinations — signals are pattern-based, not ground-truth verification
  • Does not replace human review — use to triage, not to approve
  • PII detection is regex-based (~90% for standard formats, lower for variations)
  • Prompt-injection detection is pattern-based — novel or obfuscated injections can evade it
  • + 2 more — see product page

Developer Security vs HAIEC Platform Validation

Developer Security tools check your code and model I/O. They do not provide complete AI assurance. HAIEC Platform Validation adds runtime adversarial testing, regulatory control evaluation, and assurance workflows.

Developer Security

  • Static source-code analysis (AI AppSec)
  • Tenant boundary isolation checks (MCP Tenant Isolation)
  • LLM I/O verification and guardrails (LLMVerify)
  • Runs in IDE, CI/CD, or local CLI
  • Produces deterministic, reproducible evidence
  • No HAIEC account required for the open-source packages

HAIEC Platform Validation

  • Runtime adversarial testing against live AI systems
  • Regulatory control evaluation (SOC 2, ISO 42001, EU AI Act, NYC LL144)
  • Audit Orchestrator combining static, runtime, and regulatory results
  • Tamper-evident, SHA-256 signed report generation
  • Compliance Twin for continuous compliance history
  • Assurance workflows for auditor review and sign-off

This is not complete AI assurance.

Developer Security tools find code-level and I/O-level risks. They do not test runtime behavior, evaluate regulatory controls, or produce compliance certifications. For assurance workflows, use HAIEC Platform Validation alongside these developer tools.