Loading service...
Loading service...
83%
of dev teams have no formal AI coding tool security policy
512K
lines of Claude Code source exposed in the 2026 npm leak, including hardcoded dev keys
1 in 3
AI-generated code snippets contains at least one security vulnerability
$4.88M
average cost of a data breach in 2026 (IBM Cost of Data Breach Report)
Claude Code and tools like it ship with permissive defaults designed for individual developers. When adopted across a team without hardening, those defaults create three categories of risk that most engineering leaders do not discover until after an incident.
AI coding agents read your entire codebase — including .env files, private keys, and database connection strings — and send that context to external inference APIs. Without explicit exclusion rules, your secrets leave your network with every prompt.
An attacker who can place a file in your codebase can embed hidden instructions that Claude Code will execute when it reads that file. Third-party packages, client-submitted code, and public READMEs are all potential injection vectors.
Claude Code's YOLO mode and MCP server integrations can execute shell commands, make network requests, and modify files without developer confirmation. One misconfigured permission scope in a production environment can cause irreversible damage.
Our AI code security engagement covers every layer of your AI-assisted development workflow, from initial audit through ongoing monitoring.
We map exactly what your AI coding agents can access: files, environment variables, shell commands, external APIs, and MCP server permissions. You get a complete picture of your attack surface before hardening begins.
We configure .claudeignore to exclude sensitive files, set command allowlists, define approval gate policies, vet every MCP server, and integrate pre-tool hooks that validate actions before execution.
A half-day workshop covering prompt injection recognition, context hygiene, safe .env practices, reviewing AI-generated code for vulnerabilities, and operating AI agents in production without creating liability.
Monthly configuration audits as your codebase evolves, real-time alerting on policy violations, SAST pipeline maintenance, and an incident response playbook your team can execute without calling us first.
01
We review your current Claude Code and AI coding agent setup: file access scope, shell permissions, MCP servers, secrets exposure, and developer practices. You receive a written findings report with severity ratings.
3-5 days
02
We implement the fixes: .claudeignore configuration, approval gates, MCP server scoping, hook policies, and CI/CD SAST integration. All changes are documented and version-controlled.
5-7 days
03
Monthly configuration reviews, developer training refreshers, and an on-call incident response SLA. As your team grows and your AI toolchain evolves, your security posture keeps pace.
Ongoing retainer
Default Claude Code installations are optimized for individual developer speed. Enterprise team deployments need a different posture.
Every engagement delivers a complete security posture for your AI-assisted development workflow — not just a report, but working configurations your team can use from day one.
Relevant if you are using
Claude Code (Anthropic)
Our primary focus area. We know the leaked architecture.
GitHub Copilot
Permission scoping and enterprise policy configuration.
Cursor
Rules files, .cursorignore, and context window hygiene.
MCP Servers
Trust assessment and permission scoping for any MCP integration.
Custom AI coding agents
Architecture review for internally built coding assistants.
Tell us how your team is currently using Claude Code or other AI coding tools. We will identify your top three exposure points and outline what a full hardening engagement would cover.