// Decision comparison
Reviewing your AI SaaS yourself vs human review
Quick answer
Reviewing your own SaaS with AI (Cursor, Claude Code, Codex) is the right first pass: it catches exposed secrets, stale dependencies, missing validation, the obvious. Where AI alone fails is anything that needs business context it does not have: it does not know that endpoint should check the plan, that this id should belong to the owner, that this billing flow has a path that grants free access.
Rule of thumb: use AI (and a good prompt, like the Promptbook) to clear the obvious yourself. Bring in human review when a B2B customer asks for proof, third-party personal data is involved, or you get a signal that some flow grants the wrong access.
Where AI alone leaves you exposed
AI reviews the code it sees, with the context you gave it. It does not open the product, does not chain an attack, does not know what "wrong access" means in your domain, and tends to hand you too much confidence when it returns "looks ok".
| Situation | AI alone | Human review (RET) |
|---|---|---|
| Exposed secret, stale dep, missing validation | Catches it well | Confirms and prioritizes |
| Plan / billing rule specific to your product | Does not know what is correct | Understands and tests it |
| IDOR / one tenant’s data leaking to another | Rarely | Primary focus |
| Chaining flaws into a real attack | Does not do it | Does it, proves it |
| Proof for a B2B sale / questionnaire | Not usable | Report a customer accepts |
| Overconfidence | High risk ("looks ok") | Trained skepticism |
When staying with AI alone is the right call
We are not telling you to hire a human on day one. If you are solo, still pre-revenue, with no sensitive data and you just want to avoid obvious mistakes, AI guided by a good prompt does the job, and it is the best use of your time and money right now. Paying for human review before that is early.
Human review enters the moment a mistake gets expensive: first paying customer, first third-party personal data, first B2B sale that asks for proof. That is when RET reads 1 to 3 sensitive flows in Risk Review and says what to fix, what to monitor and what needs a pentest later.
Frequently asked questions
Can AI not review security on its own?
It reviews the obvious well: secrets, dependencies, validation. What it does not do is understand your product’s business rules, so it misses plan-access abuse, cross-tenant leakage and billing logic flaws. Those need a human eye.
So the Promptbook is not enough?
The Promptbook is enough for the first pass on your own and for classifying signals. That is exactly what it is for. When a signal is serious (access, data, money), the next step is a human review, and the Promptbook already hands you the material organized for it.
When is it worth paying for human review?
When the cost of a mistake rises: paying customer, third-party personal data, a B2B sale that requires proof. Before that, guided AI is enough and cheaper.
Who runs the review at RET?
Gabriel Lima Ferreira, founder and lead pentester. Risk Review reads 1 to 3 sensitive flows with authorization and returns fix priority.