‹ JackpotQuality report QR-26-00060
Jackpot
Prize-draw e-commerce platform where product purchases become raffle tickets; ASP.NET Core + Flutter + SQL Server.
- Product ID
- B0005-89299
- Builder
- Chow Studio
- Version reviewed
- 1.0.0 · released 23 Oct 2026
- Stack
- ASP.NET Core 10 (MVC + Minimal API) · C# 12 / .NET 10 · SQL Server 2019+
- Built with
- Claude Code
- Review period
- 23 Oct 2026 – 23 Oct 2026
- ✓AI code audit6 checks · 23 Oct 2026
- ✓Installed & run23 Oct 2026
- ✓Demo vs delivered23 Oct 2026
- ✓Final sign-off23 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.
- ✓17 of 17 promised items delivered (setup guide, example config and the rest).
- ✓Security scored 92/100 with no failing check.
- !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 credentials found. The demo admin password 'Admin@123' is weak and ships in seed.sql; buyers must change it immediately. Example files (.env.example, appsettings.example.json) contain placeholder secrets that are correctly excluded from deployment but should be clearer. All other secrets use environment variables or user input as intended. | 92 | Warning |
| Dependency vulnerabilities | All dependencies are pinned in lockfiles. .NET packages are current (.NET 10, latest stable versions). Flutter dependencies are 6-12 months old but no known critical vulnerabilities found. Some minor updates available (riverpod 2.6.1→latest, go_router 14.6.2→latest). No wildcard versions or missing lockfiles. | 85 | Warning |
| Authorisation & access control | All mutating and admin endpoints require authentication with JWT (API) or cookie (admin panel). Role checks are enforced via policies. Passwords use [hidden] with 100k iterations. Minor gaps: member read endpoints (orders, tickets, wallet) lack explicit ownership checks in some service methods, relying on controller-level filtering. No critical exposure foun | 92 | Warning |
| Database access rules | All SQL uses Dapper with parameters only—no concatenation or injection paths found. Delete and update statements correctly scope by ID or member. The schema is complete and can be created from empty. Minor issues: a few foreign keys lack indexes (Country on Member, Product, Campaign), and one wallet update uses string interpolation for the column name (safe but inconsistent). | 92 | Pass |
| Code structure & duplication | The .NET project has good separation of concerns (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Web layers) and Flutter follows feature-based organization. However, there is notable duplication in password handling across Flutter screens, some large service files, and hard-coded configuration values scattered in multiple places. The admin panel views reuse partials well, but the codebase would benefit from extracting common patterns. | 72 | Warning |
| Build reproducibility | The project is well-structured with consistent .NET 10 and Flutter SDK references, proper lock files, and a comprehensive setup guide. Docker Compose and database scripts are present and coherent. Minor issues: the setup document doesn't specify the exact Flutter version needed, and the iOS build prerequisites could be clearer about requiring a Mac with Xcode. | 92 | Pass |
Open warnings
Problems that did not stop the listing. They stay on the product page until a later version fixes them.
All dependencies are pinned in lockfiles. .NET packages are current (.NET 10, latest stable versions). Flutter dependencies are 6-12 months old but no known critical vulnerabilities found. Some minor updates available (riverpod 2.6.1→latest, go_router 14.6.2→latest). No wildcard versions or missing lockfiles.
No real credentials found. The demo admin password 'Admin@123' is weak and ships in seed.sql; buyers must change it immediately. Example files (.env.example, appsettings.example.json) contain placeholder secrets that are correctly excluded from deployment but should be clearer. All other secrets use environment variables or user input as intended.
All mutating and admin endpoints require authentication with JWT (API) or cookie (admin panel). Role checks are enforced via policies. Passwords use [hidden] with 100k iterations. Minor gaps: member read endpoints (orders, tickets, wallet) lack explicit ownership checks in some service methods, relying on controller-level filtering. No critical exposure foun
The .NET project has good separation of concerns (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Web layers) and Flutter follows feature-based organization. However, there is notable duplication in password handling across Flutter screens, some large service files, and hard-coded configuration values scattered in multiple places. The admin panel views reuse partials well, but the codebase would benefit from extracting common patterns.
Requirement list
What the builder agreed to deliver before uploading — 17 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)Met
- 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 23 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 23 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 23 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.