Get ready for the technical review
standing between you and the wire.
A quarter of one YC batch shipped codebases roughly 95% AI-generated (YC W25, reported by TechCrunch), and an AI-generated codebase that nobody has independently checked is exactly what a technical partner's diligence is designed to catch. If your term sheet has a technical contingency, we produce the scorecard, architecture review, and remediation roadmap their technical partner expects, on a diligence timeline, not a normal engineering sprint.
The findings that sink term sheets aren't exotic.
They're the same handful of things a technical partner checks for in any AI-built app: a database with row-level security switched off, a Stripe key sitting in the client bundle, an endpoint that returns any user's data if you change one number in the URL. We find it first, on your timeline, and either fix it or tell you precisely what it will take.
- Critical vulnerabilities4 → 0
- Row-level security coveragepartial → full
- Exposed secrets3 → 0
- Vendor lock-in flags2 → documented
- Diligence package deliveredn/a → ready
Hypothetical example of a diligence-readiness scorecard. Not a specific client.
Someone is about to look under the hood.
- Your term sheet has a technical due diligence contingency and a close date attached to it.
- The investor's technical partner asked to see the codebase, or asked to talk to your CTO, and you don't have one.
- You genuinely don't know what percentage of your codebase is AI-generated, or how thoroughly it's been checked.
- Nobody has ever run a real security or architecture audit on the product you're raising on.
- You're quietly worried about what a real review would surface, and the deal timeline doesn't leave room to find out slowly.
Built for a diligence clock, not a normal sprint.
- DAY 0Rapid intake.
Read the term sheet's technical contingency language and get repository and infrastructure access, same day.
- DAY 1–2Security scorecard.
Full audit against the findings that actually sink deals: exposed keys, disabled row-level security, unauthenticated endpoints, and missing test coverage.
- DAY 1–3Architecture review.
Map the system, flag scaling ceilings, single points of failure, and vendor lock-in, including no-code platform dependencies investors ask about directly.
- DAY 3Remediation roadmap.
A prioritized list written for a technical partner to read, with realistic timelines and cost to fix each item.
- ONGOINGFix the blockers.
Remediate on the diligence clock, and separate what's fixable before close from what needs a documented post-close commitment.
- HANDOFFDeliver the package.
Scorecard, architecture document, remediation roadmap, and before-and-after evidence, ready to hand to their technical partner directly.
A package that stands on its own with a technical reader.
- A security scorecard. Independently produced, not self-reported, with every finding tied to specific evidence.
- An architecture review document. System map, scaling ceilings, and vendor lock-in flagged plainly.
- A remediation roadmap. What's fixed already, what's fixable before close, and what needs a post-close commitment.
- Direct fixes for close-blocking issues. Not just a list, actual remediation on the clock you're working against.
- A package written for a non-founder reader. Handed directly to an investor's technical partner, no translation required.
Priced for a deal timeline, not a leisurely one.
A $1,500 Rapid Diagnostic is available for an initial read before the full scorecard. Final remediation scope depends on what the scorecard finds and how many days remain before close.
Pending scope. The package you hand to their technical partner, delivered in 2 to 3 business days.
Fixing the close-blocking findings before your deal timeline runs out.
See the full pricing breakdown for every service.
If any of this sounds like you.
Composite personas, written to describe who this is for. Not real clients, and not real messages.
"An investor wants to see the code, and I'm not sure what they'll find."
You raised on a great product that's mostly AI-generated and diligence is in two weeks. We assess the code, remediate what we can before the date, and prepare a written remediation plan for the rest.
"A potential acquirer's engineers want to review our stack."
Same rigor, same deliverable, whether the reviewer is a VC's technical partner or an acquirer's engineering lead.
Exactly what is in scope, and exactly what is not.
The same spec block sits on every service page, so you can compare them line for line. What is excluded matters as much as what is included, because that is where scope disputes come from.
- A security scorecard covering the areas a technical diligence process actually examines: encryption, authentication and access control, and vulnerability management.
- A hardcoded-secrets sweep across the codebase and full git history, which is the single fastest way to fail a diligence review and the easiest to fix before one.
- An architecture review written for a technical reader on the other side of the table, covering the data model, the scaling path and the known debt.
- A remediation roadmap ranking every finding by whether it blocks the close, discounts the valuation, or is simply worth knowing.
- Direct remediation of the close-blocking items inside the engagement, on the diligence timeline rather than after it.
- A package assembled so it can be handed to an investor's technical partner without you having to translate it first.
- A guaranteed outcome. We prepare you for the review and fix what it will find. We do not control the reviewer, and nobody honest will promise you that they do.
- Any certification. We assess, harden, remediate and document. No engineering firm can issue a SOC 2 report or certify HIPAA compliance. See the note below this block.
- Financial, legal or commercial due diligence. This is the technical half only.
- Representing you on the diligence call, unless that is agreed separately. The package is written so you do not need us in the room.
- Closing every finding. Anything that is not close-blocking is scoped separately so you are not paying diligence-timeline rates for work that can wait.
- Ongoing engineering after the round closes, unless you move to a retainer.
A security scorecard, an architecture review document, a remediation roadmap with close-blocking items marked, and the close-blocking items themselves fixed. All written for a reader who is technical but who has never seen your codebase.
Scorecard and architecture review typically take 2 to 3 business days from the point access is granted. Remediation of close-blocking findings runs alongside, on whatever days remain before the review.
Senior engineers only, with production experience that predates the current generation of AI tooling. The engineer who writes the scorecard is the engineer who fixes what it found. No junior pool, no offshore handoff, no account manager in between.
- Days remaining before the review. This is the one service where the deadline is usually the dominant variable, and compressing it costs more.
- Severity and number of close-blocking findings, which is only knowable after the scorecard.
- Codebase size and how many separate services and providers are in play.
- Data sensitivity, which raises both the diligence scrutiny and the consequence tier the work is priced in.
- How much documentation exists already. Investors ask for documents, and writing them from nothing takes time.
Tell us the date of the diligence call. That sets everything else. We confirm scope and access the same day where the deadline is tight, deliver the scorecard and architecture review in 2 to 3 business days, and spend the remaining time closing whatever would have blocked the round.
We can assess a system against a named standard's technical requirements, harden it, remediate what fails, and produce documentation an auditor will test. We cannot certify compliance with any of them, and neither can any other engineering firm. A SOC 2 report is an attestation issued only by a licensed CPA firm. HIPAA compliance is the covered entity's own legal obligation, and no government-issued HIPAA certification exists. A PCI DSS attestation can only be issued by a certified Qualified Security Assessor. We prepare for those processes and we support your path through them.
What founders ask before diligence.
How fast can you turn this around?
The security scorecard and architecture review typically take 2 to 3 business days once we have access. If your close date is inside a week, tell us that in the first message and we'll structure the engagement around it.
Will you talk directly to our investor's technical partner?
Yes. The deliverable is written to be handed to a non-founder technical reader, and a senior engineer can join a call with their technical partner if that's useful to move things along.
What if you find something bad?
We tell you plainly, the same day we find it. Even serious findings, like disabled row-level security or exposed keys, are fixable in days, not months, once they're found and scoped. We separate what's fixable before close from what needs a documented post-close commitment.
Do you sign an NDA?
Yes, standard practice for this engagement. We're regularly inside pre-close codebases and treat access accordingly.
What if diligence closes in under a week?
Say so immediately. We can compress the scorecard and architecture review into a rapid pass and prioritize only the findings that are actually deal-relevant, with a clear list of what gets a full fix now versus a committed timeline after close.
Can this double as our first real security audit?
Yes, if this is your first time going through diligence. The scorecard and findings are the same rigor as our standalone AI App Security Audit, just packaged and paced for a diligence deadline.
Send us the repo and the close date. We'll move on your timeline.
A senior engineer reads your actual code and gives you a straight assessment. No sales engineer, no junior.