Code & applications
PartialDesign / vibe coding
Insecure-design defects demonstrable from the structure (OWASP A04): privilege concentration, trust-boundary violations, fail-open gates, model output reaching a privileged sink, security-by-convention.
Family facts
- Code
- FAM-CODE-DESIGN
- Status
- beta — code maturity
- Availability
- partial — whether it is offerable
- Ingest
- pull — how a target enters
- Rules of Engagement
- Not required
- Kind
- Family (a selectable assessment)
What it decides
Whether the architecture itself violates a security invariant even when every individual line is correct.
How it works
It reasons over the call / dependency / module graph rather than line patterns, and each candidate carries structural evidence plus a concrete security implication — not a “smell”. It promotes only the high-severity structural classes it can substantiate from the graph.
Absence of a defect is never reported as “clean architecture”: it is the limit of what the graph can prove, so the honest verdict is UNKNOWN rather than CLEAN.
A worked example
A component that concentrates privilege and is reachable from an untrusted boundary with a fail-open check is flagged with the structural path that makes it dangerous, not merely because the code “looks risky”.
Declared limits
Python-only, derived from the graph; the cross-file trust-flow class stays structural and is not promoted. Only high-severity structural classes are surfaced.
References
References point to public, well-known technical sources for further study.
Related articles
