Enji GuardA source code audit that ends in fixes, not a PDF
Most source code audit tools hand you a report and a bill. Guard audits the repository and the app it powers on a schedule, then turns findings into GitHub issues or pull requests your team can review.
1 repo · setup in about 5 minutes · no card, no commitment
01
A source code audit should not age on day one
A one-time audit is useful, then the next commit lands. Guard keeps the audit connected to the living GitHub repo, so findings can stay tied to current code instead of becoming a snapshot filed away after delivery.
02
What the source audit covers
Each run applies senior-engineer runbooks across the surfaces that matter in AI-assisted codebases:
- Security and exposure: leaked secrets, open routes, broken access control
- Dependencies: vulnerable, abandoned, hallucinated, or unvetted packages
- Tests: coverage that looks green but misses critical behavior
- Code health: duplication, dead code, risky hotspots, and drift
- AI readiness: whether agents can safely understand and change the repo
03
Static review plus runtime context
Source code tells you what the app intends to do. It does not always prove what the running app actually does. Guard can connect a repo to the website it powers, so source findings and runtime evidence can be reviewed together where that matters.
04
No report to file, no checklist to chase
A traditional source code audit ends in a PDF: a source code audit report plus a remediation checklist someone on your team still has to work through. Guard skips that handoff. Findings land in GitHub as issues, and bounded fixes can come back as pull requests, so the audit ends in merged changes instead of a document.
05
Findings become issues and pull requests
Findings come back as reviewable GitHub issues with evidence and rationale. When a fix is bounded and useful, Guard can open a narrow pull request for human review.
Quick questions
How is this different from a traditional one-time source code audit?
A consultancy audit hands you a PDF that ages with the next commit. Guard runs the same kind of review on a schedule, connected to the live GitHub repo, and turns findings into issues or pull requests instead of a document you file away.
Can you audit a private repository?
Yes. Guard connects through a GitHub App on the repos you choose, public or private, and the access is revocable at any time.
Is this an automated audit or a human review?
Automated, but it runs senior-engineer runbooks rather than a generic ruleset, so the findings read like a careful reviewer's notes instead of a wall of low-confidence alerts.
Will it change my code, or only report?
By default it reports: findings come back as reviewable GitHub issues. When a fix is bounded and useful, Guard can open a narrow pull request your team reviews and merges. Nothing changes without review.
Audit your source, then fix it.
Connect a repo and get your first audit report in a few minutes. No card.