ProcureHub

Procure-to-pay portal for UAE/GCC companies: requests, approvals, RFQs, orders, receiving, invoice matching, payments.

Product ID: B0001-75632
Builder: Chow Studio
Version reviewed: 1.3.1 · released 27 Oct 2026
Stack: Laravel 12 · PHP 8.2 · MySQL 8.0 / MariaDB 10.4
Built with: Claude Code
Review period: 27 Oct 2026 – 27 Oct 2026

Download PDF View the product

81out of 100 Passed with 3 warningsPass mark 75 and no failing check.

Scores

Security83

Code structure84

Docs & completeness87

Dependency health100

Build & deploy58

AI code audit6 checks · 27 Oct 2026
Installed & run27 Oct 2026
Demo vs delivered27 Oct 2026
Final sign-off27 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.
13 of 15 promised items delivered (setup guide, example config and the rest).
Security scored 83/100 with no failing check.
3 open warnings — explained in part 1.

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	Every secret-scan candidate is a Laravel Password facade call, a validation rule, documentation text, or a docker-compose variable that must be set by the buyer. .env.example leaves APP_KEY, DB_PASSWORD, MAIL_PASSWORD and AWS keys empty. The only caveat is the documented shared demo password, which is intentional and gated by switches.	96	Pass
Dependency vulnerabilities	composer.lock is present with all PHP dependencies pinned to exact versions. The project runs 'composer audit' as part of its audit-dependencies script and documents the results in a project file. No known vulnerabilities were found in the current lockfile.	100	Pass
Authorisation & access control	The visible controllers (Settings, SystemSettings, Tour, ConfirmPassword) use defence in depth: HasMiddleware, route-group can: checks, Gate::authorize in actions, and password.confirm on backup/reset. Passwords use Laravel hashing and a strong policy. Most route modules and the other 30+ controllers were not in the digest, so ownership checks on id lookups could not be verified.	82	Warning
Database access rules	The visible code shows no string-built SQL and no unscoped destructive statements. The digest omitted the models, services, migrations, schema.sql and the assistant/search query code, which are the places where raw SQL and missing indexes would appear. The score is capped until those files can be reviewed.	72	Warning
Code structure & duplication	The project splits work into controllers, form requests, services and models, and the recent change deleted several duplicated IntentMatcher copies in favour of a shared BaseIntentMatcher. Remaining issues are moderate: the assistant parsers still repeat similar intent logic across modules, and some settings and seed values are hard-coded rather than configured.	84	Pass
Build reproducibility	The Laravel/Composer setup, .env.example and docker-compose are coherent (compose requires DB passwords, uses MariaDB 10.11, with an entrypoint). The main risk is that TourController reads from base_path('_prototype/'), while the changed-file list shows public/tour-demo/*.html deleted and no _prototype/ files appear in the tree. HowToSetup.md, the Dockerfile and composer.json were not visible, so the prerequisites and step order could not be verified.	58	Warning

Open warnings

Problems that did not stop the listing. They stay on the product page until a later version fixes them.

Warning 1 Layered authz on visible controllers; some public tour routes and unseen route modules limit confidence

The visible controllers (Settings, SystemSettings, Tour, ConfirmPassword) use defence in depth: HasMiddleware, route-group can: checks, Gate::authorize in actions, and password.confirm on backup/reset. Passwords use Laravel hashing and a strong policy. Most route modules and the other 30+ controllers were not in the digest, so ownership checks on id lookups could not be verified.

Warning 2 No injection or unscoped deletes seen, but most DB code was not shown, so the score is capped

The visible code shows no string-built SQL and no unscoped destructive statements. The digest omitted the models, services, migrations, schema.sql and the assistant/search query code, which are the places where raw SQL and missing indexes would appear. The score is capped until those files can be reviewed.

Warning 3 Mostly reproducible, but the tour depends on a _prototype/ folder that is not in the archive tree

The Laravel/Composer setup, .env.example and docker-compose are coherent (compose requires DB passwords, uses MariaDB 10.11, with an entrypoint). The main risk is that TourController reads from base_path('_prototype/'), while the changed-file list shows public/tour-demo/*.html deleted and no _prototype/ files appear in the tree. HowToSetup.md, the Dockerfile and composer.json were not visible, so the prerequisites and step order could not be verified.

Requirement list

What the builder agreed to deliver before uploading — 13 of 15 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 Partial
README.md Met
HowToSetup.md Met
CLAUDE.md (or AGENTS.md) (nice)Met
CHANGELOG.md (nice)Met
.env.example Met
a project file Met
a project file (nice)Met

Part 2

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 27 Oct 2026

A 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 27 Oct 2026

A 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 27 Oct 2026 with 3 warnings shown publicly.

What this report covers — and what it doesn't

It covers version 1.3.1 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.

Report history

Report	Version	Date	Score	Status
QR-26-00073	1.3.1	27 Oct 2026	81	Current
QR-26-00009	1.0.0	5 Oct 2026	92	Replaced

Vibe96 FZ-LLC, Dubai, UAE. This report describes the product at the time of review and is not a warranty.