‹ ShopNestQuality report QR-26-00026
ShopNest
Full-stack e-commerce platform with REST API, admin panel, storefront website and Flutter mobile app
- Product ID
- B0003-21326
- Builder
- Max code
- Version reviewed
- 1.0.0 · released 7 Oct 2026
- Stack
- ASP.NET Core 10 MVC + Web API · C# 12 (.NET 10) · SQL Server 2019
- Built with
- Claude Code
- Review period
- 7 Oct 2026 – 7 Oct 2026
- ✓AI code audit6 checks · 6 Oct 2026
- ✓Installed & run7 Oct 2026
- ✓Demo vs delivered7 Oct 2026
- ✓Final sign-off7 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.
- !12 of 17 promised items delivered (setup guide, example config and the rest).
- !Security scored 60/100.
- !4 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 API keys or credentials were found in the codebase. However, the JWT signing key in appsettings.json uses a weak placeholder that ships to buyers, and demo credentials are enabled by default in configuration files. These should be replaced with environment variables or user secrets before production deployment. | 92 | Warning |
| Dependency vulnerabilities | The Flutter app has a proper pubspec.lock with pinned dependencies. The .NET projects use implicit package references without a packages.lock.json, which is acceptable for .NET but reduces reproducibility. Several Flutter packages are outdated (dio 5.4.0 vs 5.7+, flutter_bloc 8.1.3 vs 8.1.6+) but no known critical vulnerabilities were found in the versions present. | 72 | Warning |
| Authorisation & access control | Minor points were sent to the builder to improve; none of them stopped the listing. | 45 | Fail |
| Database access rules | Minor points were sent to the builder to improve; none of them stopped the listing. | 42 | Fail |
| Code structure & duplication | The project has acceptable module boundaries but suffers from significant code duplication across Flutter features and oversized controller/service files in the .NET backend. Several files exceed 500 lines with mixed concerns. Hard-coded values appear in multiple places where configuration would be better. | 68 | Warning |
| Build reproducibility | The solution builds and the database schema migrates via EF Core, but the setup document does not explain how to deploy the stored procedures from ShopNest.Database (SSDT project, Windows/VS only). Docker compose references a project file and seed.sql that exist, but the compose file itself is not in the digest. Firebase push notifications require manual JSON upload with no fallback. Flutter app config requires manual JSON creation from an example. | 72 | Warning |
Open warnings
Problems that did not stop the listing. They stay on the product page until a later version fixes them.
The Flutter app has a proper pubspec.lock with pinned dependencies. The .NET projects use implicit package references without a packages.lock.json, which is acceptable for .NET but reduces reproducibility. Several Flutter packages are outdated (dio 5.4.0 vs 5.7+, flutter_bloc 8.1.3 vs 8.1.6+) but no known critical vulnerabilities were found in the versions present.
No real API keys or credentials were found in the codebase. However, the JWT signing key in appsettings.json uses a weak placeholder that ships to buyers, and demo credentials are enabled by default in configuration files. These should be replaced with environment variables or user secrets before production deployment.
The project has acceptable module boundaries but suffers from significant code duplication across Flutter features and oversized controller/service files in the .NET backend. Several files exceed 500 lines with mixed concerns. Hard-coded values appear in multiple places where configuration would be better.
The solution builds and the database schema migrates via EF Core, but the setup document does not explain how to deploy the stored procedures from ShopNest.Database (SSDT project, Windows/VS only). Docker compose references a project file and seed.sql that exist, but the compose file itself is not in the digest. Firebase push notifications require manual JSON upload with no fallback. Flutter app config requires manual JSON creation from an example.
Requirement list
What the builder agreed to deliver before uploading — 12 of 17 met.
- Complete source for every component Met
- No real credentials in the archive Met
- Builds from a clean machine Partial
- Database script or migrations Met
- Authentication and roles on every mutating endpoint Partial
- Pinned dependencies without critical CVEs (nice)Partial
- Documentation set (nice)Partial
- 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)Missing
- 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 7 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 7 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 7 Oct 2026 with 4 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.