lovable-security-posturelisted

# Lovable Security Posture Source: Lovable's Security Office Hours webinar (Igor Andriushchenko, security lead), 2026-07-16. Captures the platform's own stated security model and the practical playbook for using it well — not generic security advice, specifically how Lovable's tooling is meant to be used. ## The core threat-modeling exercise (Adam Shostak's four questions) Before deep-diving any Lovable project's security, walk through these four questions explicitly with whoever owns the project — this is cheap and surfaces what actually matters before spending scan/audit effort on the wrong things: 1. **What are we building?** — what is the app, what's the end goal, what does success look like. A social app and a payments app have completely different security postures. 2. **What can go wrong?** — enumerate concretely, given #1. Not generic OWASP categories in the abstract — translate them into "for *this* app, this would mean X." 3. **What are we doing about it today?** — ask the Lovable agent directly: "is my app protected against X?" It has full context on the actual codebase and can answer concretely, not hypothetically. 4. **Is that enough?** — given the app's actual stakes (financial data? minors? just a hobby project?), decide if the current protection level is proportionate, or if a gap needs closing now vs. later. This framing is the fastest way to decide where deep audit effort belongs. See [[lovable-rigor]] for the mechanics of actually fixing something once