‹ LoyalBiteQuality report QR-26-00016
LoyalBite
Multi-brand restaurant loyalty platform with POS-initiated transactions and mobile customer app
- Product ID
- B0003-72659
- Builder
- Max code
- Version reviewed
- 1.0.0 · released 6 Oct 2026
- Stack
- ASP.NET Core 10 MVC + EF Core 10 · C# 12 (.NET 10) · SQL Server 2019
- Built with
- Claude Code
- Review period
- 6 Oct 2026 – 6 Oct 2026
- ✓AI code audit6 checks · 6 Oct 2026
- ✓Installed & run6 Oct 2026
- ✓Demo vs delivered6 Oct 2026
- ✓Final sign-off6 Oct 2026
At a glance
- ✓Installed and run from the delivered code — 8 of 8 checks answered yes.
- ✓Live demo compared with the delivered code — 7 of 7 checks answered yes.
- !16 of 17 promised items delivered (setup guide, example config and the rest).
- ✓Security scored 93/100 with no failing check.
- !5 open warnings — explained in part 1.
AI code audit
The full source archive was read by our AI auditor against each check. It reads the code — it does not run it; running it is part 2.
| Check | What we found | Score | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Secrets & credentials | No real credentials found. However, the package ships with a placeholder Firebase google-services.json that will cause runtime errors if not replaced, and demo seed data uses weak passwords ('[hidden]'). The .env.example and appsettings.example.json correctly use placeholders, and the actual secrets files are properly gitignored. | 92 | Warning |
| Dependency vulnerabilities | The .NET project lacks a packages.lock.json, making builds non-reproducible. Both Flutter apps use outdated packages (some 1-2 years old) but no known critical vulnerabilities were identified in the versions present. The customer app's firebase_messaging and other Firebase packages are significantly outdated. | 72 | Warning |
| Authorisation & access control | All mutating and admin endpoints are properly guarded with authentication and role checks. The POS API correctly restricts staff to their own restaurant. Minor gaps: customer read endpoints (favorites, notifications, stamp history) trust the JWT uid claim without explicit ownership validation in queries, and the POS /transaction/history endpoint lacks pagination which could expose large datasets. | 92 | Warning |
| Database access rules | All database access uses EF Core LINQ with parameterized queries. No raw SQL, string concatenation or injection paths found. Delete and update operations are properly scoped by user/restaurant. Schema has comprehensive foreign keys and indexes. Minor: a few foreign key columns lack explicit indexes in the migration, though EF Core creates them automatically. | 95 | Pass |
| Code structure & duplication | The project has good separation of concerns overall (controllers, services, repositories), but contains significant duplication in Flutter apps (especially Dio client setup and token handling), oversized service files in the backend, and hard-coded configuration scattered across multiple files. Several utility and API files exceed 300 lines and mix concerns. | 72 | Warning |
| Build reproducibility | The project can be built and run from source with clear prerequisites. However, HowToSetup.md has ordering issues (references Firebase before explaining it), the customer app's Firebase placeholder will cause runtime failures, and some environment variable examples could be clearer. Docker compose works but the manual setup path has small gaps. | 78 | Warning |
Open warnings
Problems that did not stop the listing. They stay on the product page until a later version fixes them.
No real credentials found. However, the package ships with a placeholder Firebase google-services.json that will cause runtime errors if not replaced, and demo seed data uses weak passwords ('[hidden]'). The .env.example and appsettings.example.json correctly use placeholders, and the actual secrets files are properly gitignored.
The .NET project lacks a packages.lock.json, making builds non-reproducible. Both Flutter apps use outdated packages (some 1-2 years old) but no known critical vulnerabilities were identified in the versions present. The customer app's firebase_messaging and other Firebase packages are significantly outdated.
All mutating and admin endpoints are properly guarded with authentication and role checks. The POS API correctly restricts staff to their own restaurant. Minor gaps: customer read endpoints (favorites, notifications, stamp history) trust the JWT uid claim without explicit ownership validation in queries, and the POS /transaction/history endpoint lacks pagination which could expose large datasets.
The project has good separation of concerns overall (controllers, services, repositories), but contains significant duplication in Flutter apps (especially Dio client setup and token handling), oversized service files in the backend, and hard-coded configuration scattered across multiple files. Several utility and API files exceed 300 lines and mix concerns.
The project can be built and run from source with clear prerequisites. However, HowToSetup.md has ordering issues (references Firebase before explaining it), the customer app's Firebase placeholder will cause runtime failures, and some environment variable examples could be clearer. Docker compose works but the manual setup path has small gaps.
Requirement list
What the builder agreed to deliver before uploading — 16 of 17 met.
- Complete source for every component Met
- No real credentials in the archive Met
- Builds from a clean machine Met
- Database script or migrations Met
- Authentication and roles on every mutating endpoint Met
- Pinned dependencies without critical CVEs (nice)Partial
- Documentation set (nice)Met
- Working live demo Met
- Mobile app buildable and pointed at a configurable API Met
- README.md Met
- HowToSetup.md Met
- CLAUDE.md (or AGENTS.md) (nice)Met
- CHANGELOG.md (nice)Met
- appsettings.example.json Met
- a project file Met
- a project file (nice)Met
- a project file Met
Human review
Reviewers from the Vibe96 team in Dubai worked through each question below; a final reviewer signed it off.
Stage 1 — Installed and run from the delivered code
Completed 6 Oct 2026A reviewer installed the product on a clean machine, following only the guide that ships with it.
| Question | Answer | Reviewer's note |
|---|---|---|
| Packages restored without errors | Yes | |
| Solution builds clean | Yes | |
| Database created from the shipped script or migrations | Yes | |
| First sign-in works with the documented steps | Yes | |
| Setup guide is accurate and complete | Yes | |
| Every module in the feature list opens and works | Yes | |
| No real secrets in the archive | Yes | |
| Branding and company details can be changed without code | Yes |
Stage 2 — Live demo compared with the delivered code
Completed 6 Oct 2026A second reviewer checked that what the listing and demo show is what the buyer receives.
| Question | Answer | Reviewer's note |
|---|---|---|
| Demo URL is reachable | Yes | |
| Demo credentials work | Yes | |
| Demo runs the same version as the archive | Yes | |
| All five differentiators are visible in the demo | Yes | |
| Screenshots match the demo | Yes | |
| Nothing in the demo is missing from the code | Yes | |
| Datasheet claims are accurate | Yes |
Changes asked for during review
- None — approved on the first round.
- Sign-off: approved for sale on 6 Oct 2026 with 5 warnings shown publicly.
What this report covers — and what it doesn't
- It covers version 1.0.0 exactly as the buyer downloads it: the source archive, the setup guide and the live demo on the dates above.
- It is not a penetration test, a performance or load test, or a legal review of third-party package licences.
- Scores are a point in time. Libraries age; a later version is audited again and gets its own report.
- Your setup matters. Hosting, configuration and changes made after purchase are outside this review.
- How the score is made: each AI check is scored 0–100 and weighted (security counts most). A listing needs 75 or more, no failing check, and the human review passed.
- Always try the live demo before buying, and ask the builder questions from the product page.
Vibe96 FZ-LLC, Dubai, UAE. This report describes the product at the time of review and is not a warranty.