Is Reality Graph secure?

No tool should answer that question with 'yes'. Security is layered risk management across design, configuration, access, scanning, testing, verification, monitoring, response and recovery. Reality Graph exposes architecture and workflow controls that you can inspect, but each has coverage, configuration and bypass limits; no tool or gate guarantees secure software.

Does my source code leave my environment?

Reality Graph's own workflow state and evidence are designed to remain in your environment. Source can still leave through a configured model API, plugins, subprocesses, logs, telemetry or operator actions. Inspect the exact version, configuration and network behavior; local-first narrows one boundary but does not prove the complete data path.

Is Reality Graph GDPR compliant / SOC 2 / ISO 27001 certified?

Reality Graph is in private beta and holds no certifications - and we won't claim otherwise. The local-first architecture reduces external processing, which compliance-conscious teams value, but compliance is an assessment of your specific deployment that stays with you and your counsel.

Can Reality Graph modify or commit code on its own?

No. It is advisory by default: it structures tasks, checks boundaries, runs validation, and produces evidence - a human accepts or rejects changes. There is no auto-commit and no hidden write path.

What data does Reality Graph process, and where?

Reality Graph's task definitions, boundaries, validation receipts and evidence reports are designed for local storage alongside the code. That product boundary is not proof about the surrounding agent, model provider, shell tools, plugins, logs, backups or network configuration. Verify the deployed version and complete workflow rather than inferring a guarantee from the architecture label.

How does local-first compare to a cloud review tool for security?

A cloud review service has to receive your source code to review it, which makes its infrastructure part of your attack surface and its data practices part of your compliance story. A local-first layer keeps that surface inside the boundary you already control. Neither approach is automatically 'more secure' - but local-first means one less party to trust, and one less processor to document.

Do we need a data processing agreement for Reality Graph?

Your data protection process decides that, on the full data path, the contracts and the roles involved. Reality Graph's local-first design is an architectural input rather than a legal outcome: model providers, plugins, telemetry, support and other services can create roles of their own. Legal position July 2026; this is not legal advice.

How do I report a security issue?

Use the contact form and mark the report security-related. A report begins triage; this page promises neither a response deadline nor a particular remediation outcome. Do not include active credentials or unnecessary sensitive data.

Trust

Local-First AI Coding Security

Last updated: 2026-07-174 min read

Reality Graph’s security posture is architecture, not adjectives: local-first design, advisory defaults, explicit commit and approval boundaries, and inspectable evidence. These are controls in a layered risk-management process-not proof of secure software or a substitute for monitoring, incident response and recovery.

Contents

The principles, stated checkably

Local-first. Workflow, repository access, context, validation, and evidence live in your environment. Verifying AI-generated code should not require shipping your repository to another cloud service - what “local” really covers.
Advisory by default. Reality Graph reads, checks, and reports. It does not write, commit, or apply code on its own - a person does, at a gate, with evidence in view.
Visible data flow. What leaves your machine is determined by your configuration - for example which model API your setup uses under your own agreements - not by a hidden default. “Nothing ever leaves” would be a marketing sentence; “you can see what leaves” is an architecture property.
Least surprise. No background jobs on your repository, no telemetry phoning home from your codebase, no silent network access as a side effect of verification.
Evidence over trust. Every run produces a reviewable report - including what was skipped. The same standard this page applies to itself.

Schematic of the local-first boundary: verification work stays inside your environment; the only egress is the model API your setup already uses - configured by you, visible to you.

Because these are architecture properties, you do not have to take them on faith - each one has a concrete way to check it:

Question	How you verify it yourself
Does source code leave my environment?	Inspect configuration, plugins and subprocesses, then observe network egress during representative runs; document blind spots and exceptions.
Can it write or commit code on its own?	Check effective permissions and exercise workflow gates; this control does not establish correctness or safe deployment.
What exactly happened in a run?	Read the evidence report stored with the code - intent, changes, validation results, and what was skipped.
What does the vendor learn about my code?	Review the complete data path and provider terms; local product state alone cannot establish what every surrounding tool receives.

Checks provide bounded evidence about one deployed configuration. They do not prove the complete system secure (reviewed July 17, 2026).

What we deliberately do not claim

A security page is only as trustworthy as the claims it refuses to make. Reality Graph is in private beta, and the following are therefore stated plainly:

No certifications yet - no SOC 2, no ISO 27001. If and when formal audits happen, they will be linked here; until then, absence is stated, not papered over.
No compliance guarantees- “GDPR compliant” is a property of your deployment and your processes, assessed by your counsel. Architecture can make that assessment easier; a vendor cannot make it for you.
No “guaranteed secure AI coding” - verification reduces risk and makes it visible. It does not abolish it, and nobody serious will tell you otherwise.

The website practices what the product preaches

This site runs cookie-free: no visitor IDs, no fingerprinting, no stored IPs, no third-party trackers - aggregate, anonymous signals only, documented in the privacy notes. A product whose pitch is data control should not greet you with a consent banner.

Where Reality Graph fits

Security-sensitive teams are a core audience for a local-first verification layer - and the ones least served by adjectives. The concrete version is a page of its own: what leaves the machine and what does not, including the cases where something does.

Talk to the founder about your constraints, or request early access.

Architecture properties

Runs in your environment - local-first by design
Advisory by default: reads, checks, reports - never writes on its own
Human approval gates on every change
Data flow visible in configuration, not hidden in defaults

Deliberately not claimed

“Guaranteed secure” - verification reduces risk, it does not abolish it
GDPR/SOC 2/ISO certifications - none exist yet; absence is stated
“Zero data ever leaves” - what leaves is your visible configuration
Enterprise-readiness - it is a private beta, and says so

If these boundaries fit how your team wants to ship:

Get early access See how it works

FAQ

Is Reality Graph secure?: No tool should answer that question with 'yes'. Security is layered risk management across design, configuration, access, scanning, testing, verification, monitoring, response and recovery. Reality Graph exposes architecture and workflow controls that you can inspect, but each has coverage, configuration and bypass limits; no tool or gate guarantees secure software.
Does my source code leave my environment?: Reality Graph's own workflow state and evidence are designed to remain in your environment. Source can still leave through a configured model API, plugins, subprocesses, logs, telemetry or operator actions. Inspect the exact version, configuration and network behavior; local-first narrows one boundary but does not prove the complete data path.
Is Reality Graph GDPR compliant / SOC 2 / ISO 27001 certified?: Reality Graph is in private beta and holds no certifications - and we won't claim otherwise. The local-first architecture reduces external processing, which compliance-conscious teams value, but compliance is an assessment of your specific deployment that stays with you and your counsel.
Can Reality Graph modify or commit code on its own?: No. It is advisory by default: it structures tasks, checks boundaries, runs validation, and produces evidence - a human accepts or rejects changes. There is no auto-commit and no hidden write path.
What data does Reality Graph process, and where?: Reality Graph's task definitions, boundaries, validation receipts and evidence reports are designed for local storage alongside the code. That product boundary is not proof about the surrounding agent, model provider, shell tools, plugins, logs, backups or network configuration. Verify the deployed version and complete workflow rather than inferring a guarantee from the architecture label.
How does local-first compare to a cloud review tool for security?: A cloud review service has to receive your source code to review it, which makes its infrastructure part of your attack surface and its data practices part of your compliance story. A local-first layer keeps that surface inside the boundary you already control. Neither approach is automatically 'more secure' - but local-first means one less party to trust, and one less processor to document.
Do we need a data processing agreement for Reality Graph?: Your data protection process decides that, on the full data path, the contracts and the roles involved. Reality Graph's local-first design is an architectural input rather than a legal outcome: model providers, plugins, telemetry, support and other services can create roles of their own. Legal position July 2026; this is not legal advice.
How do I report a security issue?: Use the contact form and mark the report security-related. A report begins triage; this page promises neither a response deadline nor a particular remediation outcome. Do not include active credentials or unnecessary sensitive data.

Keep reading

SetupLocal AI Code ReviewReviewing and verifying AI-generated code inside your own environment, without uploading source to an external service - who needs it, and how to set it up.Local-firstWhat AI Coding Tools Actually ReadPrompts, repo context, indexes, telemetry - the five transmission paths mapped to countermeasures, with the measured numbers: AI-assisted commits leak secrets at twice the baseline rate.All articlesThe whole collection - 58 cited, dated guides on verifying AI-generated code.

Sources

Want to see what your last agent run would have looked like?

Request access