iOS AI Code Audit for Vibe-Coded Apps
Your app was built with AI. Are you sure it works correctly?
41% of code written today is generated by AI. Tools like Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Bolt or Lovable let you build apps in hours instead of months. The problem is what you cannot see: security breaches, memory leaks, deprecated APIs, code Apple rejects, and an architecture that collapses when you try to scale.
At AtalayaSoft we audit and fix iOS apps built with vibe coding. Our iOS architect, Francisco José García Navarro, has spent over 11 years working exclusively in native iOS and over 25 years in software development. He has designed architectures for apps with hundreds of millions of users — Zara/Inditex (218M), Banco Santander (15M), AXA, Juegos ONCE. He knows exactly where AIs fail when generating Swift code.
We don't sell fear. We sell certainty. After our audit you will know exactly what problems your app has, which are critical, and how to fix them.
This service is for you if...
You are a CTO or tech lead and your team uses AI to write iOS code
Your team uses Copilot, Cursor or Claude Code daily. Code comes out fast, but nobody reviews what the AI generates with the depth that a production app requires. You worry about security, accumulating technical debt, and Swift Concurrency warnings nobody understands.
You get: A deep technical audit with a severity-prioritised report and a remediation roadmap your team can execute sprint by sprint.
You are a founder, PM or non-technical profile who built your MVP with AI
You built your app with Bolt, Lovable, Cursor or ChatGPT. It works on your iPhone, but you do not know if it is secure, if Apple will approve it, if it will handle real users, or if you are exposing customer data without knowing it.
You get: A clear-language report (no unnecessary jargon) that tells you exactly what is right, what is wrong, and what you need to fix before launching or scaling.
You are a tech lead and have inherited iOS code written with AI
You have joined a project where the previous team built the app with Cursor or Copilot without deep review. You need to know what is underneath before touching it: where the risks are, what can be saved, what needs rewriting.
You get: A straightforward technical diagnosis. A prioritised problem map and realistic remediation effort estimate so you can negotiate timelines and resources with solid grounding.
Why AtalayaSoft to audit your iOS code
We are not an automated tool. We are not a web auditor that "also does mobile." We are a studio specialised exclusively in native iOS development since 2019.
Francisco has worked on Zara/Inditex (218M users, 4.8★ on the App Store), Banco Santander (15M users, 4.7★), AXA, El País and Juegos ONCE. He knows how to build an app that handles millions of users because he has done it.
We do not audit React, Flutter or backend. Only native iOS — Swift, SwiftUI, UIKit, and everything Apple requires to approve and maintain an app on the App Store.
We use Claude Code every day as a development tool. We know exactly what patterns AI generates, where it goes wrong, and how to fix it. We are not against AI — we are in favour of code that works.
What AI generates and nobody reviews
The six failure patterns we find in almost every iOS app built with vibe coding.
Security breaches
45% of AI code contains vulnerabilities.
Hardcoded API keys, tokens in unencrypted UserDefaults, HTTPS disabled (NSAllowsArbitraryLoads), sensitive data stored outside the Keychain.
Memory leaks and performance
1.7x more issues than in human-written code.
Retain cycles in closures (missing [weak self]), uncancelled Combine subscriptions, Tasks that never finish, heavy work on the main thread.
Deprecated APIs and obsolete code
41% of new code is AI-generated — trained on code from years ago.
NavigationView (deprecated since iOS 16), ObservableObject instead of the @Observable macro, completion handlers instead of async/await.
App Store rejection
Apple rejects ~25% of the apps it receives.
Crashes in untested edge cases, incorrect privacy labels, missing PrivacyInfo.xcprivacy, minimum functionality (Guideline 4.2).
Non-existent accessibility
Mandatory since June 2025 under the European Accessibility Act.
Hardcoded font sizes instead of Dynamic Type, missing accessibilityLabel, buttons with onTapGesture(). Fines up to one million euros.
Architecture that does not scale
Works in the demo, breaks in production.
Everything in one file. 500-line views. No layer separation. No tests. No dependency injection. Every change breaks something.
Sources: GitClear/Sonar 2025 (41%), Veracode 2025 testing 100+ LLMs (45%), CodeRabbit analysis of 470 PRs (1.7x), Apple App Review (~25%). Documented cases include the exposure of 18,000 user records in a Lovable app (The Register, Feb 2026) and Replit deleting an entire production database.
What we review in your iOS app
Security
- API keys and secrets hardcoded in source code
- Tokens and credentials stored outside the Keychain
- NSAllowsArbitraryLoads = true (HTTPS disabled)
- Sensitive data in UserDefaults, logs or cache
- Input validation and injection protection
Performance
- Memory leaks and retain cycles ([weak self] in closures)
- Combine subscriptions without stored cancellable
- Uncancelled Tasks in Swift Concurrency
- Heavy work on the main thread (UI freezes)
- Excessive battery use (location, timers, background)
Architecture
- Layer separation (domain, data, presentation)
- Monolithic files vs. decoupled modules
- Concurrency patterns (legacy GCD vs. async/await)
- Test coverage (unit, UI, snapshot)
- Dependency management and build times
App Store & Compliance
- Privacy labels and PrivacyInfo.xcprivacy correctness
- Privacy policy aligned with actual app behaviour
- Guideline 4.2 (minimum native functionality)
- Required Reason APIs and SDK signatures
- EAA / accessibility compliance (VoiceOver, Dynamic Type)
Native UI & UX
- Correct use of SwiftUI vs. UIKit
- Deprecated APIs:
NavigationView(iOS 16+),ObservableObject(iOS 17+) - Dynamic Type vs. hardcoded font sizes
- Accessibility labels, traits and focus order
ButtonvsonTapGesture()(critical for VoiceOver)- Dark mode, iPad and orientation compatibility
Choose the audit level you need
Quick Scan
Security & App Store
The essentials before publishing. Focused review of critical security breaches and the most common App Store rejection reasons. You receive a report with the 10 most serious problems and how to fix them.
- Delivery: 3–5 business days
- Written report with severity (critical / high / medium / low)
- Ideal for: Pre-launch MVPs, non-technical founders, quick validation
Full Audit
The complete picture of your app
Review of security, performance, architecture, App Store, accessibility and code quality. Includes a 30-minute video call to walk through findings and a prioritised remediation roadmap.
- Delivery: 7–10 business days
- Detailed report + video walkthrough + remediation roadmap
- Ideal for: Funded startups, teams looking to scale, apps with real users
Audit + Fix
We don't just tell you what's wrong — we fix it
Full audit + correction of all critical and high-severity issues. Verification that the app is production-ready. 30 days of post-delivery support.
- Delivery: 14–21 business days
- Everything in the previous level + fixed code + verification + support
- Ideal for: Apps that need to go to production now, founders who want to delegate the fix
The audit cost is deducted if you subsequently engage the fix or team integration service. You do not pay twice.
Not sure which level you need?
Write to us describing what you built with AI, how much code there is, and what worries you. Within 24 hours we will propose the right level — or tell you honestly if auditing does not make sense yet.
Get guidance, no commitmentHow the process works
-
01. Send us repository access
Give us access to the repo (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket) and tell us the context: which AI tools you used, what the app does, what concerns you. No unnecessary meetings — a form and code access is enough to get started.
-
02. We audit with expert human eyes
We review the code line by line with 11+ years of native iOS experience. We do not use generic automated tools — we use Instruments, Accessibility Inspector, Charles Proxy, and the same profiling stack we use on apps with 218 million users.
-
03. You receive a clear, actionable report
Every problem classified by severity (critical / high / medium / low) with explanation, exact location in the code, and recommended fix. If you are technical, you can execute the roadmap with your team. If not, we walk you through it on the video call.
-
04. We fix and/or integrate into your team
If you choose level 3, we fix directly. If you prefer your team to do it, we guide them. And if you need a senior iOS developer long-term, the natural next step is our team integration service — we already know your codebase better than anyone.
Apps where we have worked at production scale
We are not theoretical auditors. We have built and maintained iOS apps with hundreds of millions of users. That experience is what allows us to identify problems that an automated tool cannot see.
Testimonials
The team working on your project
Frequently asked questions
Was your iOS app built with AI? Find out what is underneath.
Send us access to your repository and within a week you will know exactly what problems it has, which are critical, and how to resolve them.