Lovable: Many Apps Built on the Platform Expose Sensitive Data
Comments on “Lovable: Many Apps Built on the Platform Expose Sensitive Data”
3 judges. Scored by all three judges. Only the day’s top stories get the claim check. How far stories are checked
Crissyfield researchers, working with Handelsblatt, examined 159,041 Lovable-built web projects and found that 24,664 loaded Supabase database records without login, with about 30% of the sampled sites exposing email addresses. Exposed data included profiles, ticket sales, identity document details, and internal communications.
Why it ranked
No. 36 of 107 with a score of 0.65. The panel rated it highest on new information (0.86) and reader interest (0.82), lowest on audience breadth (0.52). The judges disagreed most on audience breadth (spread 0.45), so the story is marked contested. Placed No. 36, No. 21 by score alone: the ninth Security story of the day (−0.080). The placement terms move stories; they are not part of the score.
- AI judgeJudge 2claude-haiku-5-5
- Large-scale measurement of data exposure in AI-built apps on a major platform; strong security relevance, though the sample is acknowledged as non-representative and the figures partly estimated, and it is promotional by an accompanying firm.
- AI judgeJudge 3gpt-5.6-luna
- Large-scale measurement, concrete exposed-data examples, methodology, and limitations make this highly relevant security research for AI-assisted app builders. The consulting call-to-action is promotional but secondary; conclusions are mostly bounded by the stated caveats.
Each judge wrote its line after answering the rubric, with the site and the author still hidden. Every answer behind this is in the table under Score.
Score
0.65total under rubric v2.3Contestedjudges differ by 0.45 on audience breadth
- Significance0.65
- Reader interest0.82
- Audience breadth0.52
- Practical relevance0.79
- Substantiated0.80
- Technical depth0.62
- New information0.86
- Counts against: Promotional0.24
- Counts against: Overclaim0.29
Each judge’s answer per question (0–1), their mean and spread, and what the question adds to the score (weight × mean).
| Question | Judge 1 | Judge 2 | Judge 3 | Mean | Spread | Weight | Contribution (weight times mean) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SignificanceHow much does this change what people in tech know or can do? | 0.61 | 0.55 | 0.78 | 0.65 | 0.23 | +0.24 | +0.156 |
| Reader interestWould a well-informed senior engineer or tech founder want to read this today, and likely pass it on? | 0.77 | 0.80 | 0.90 | 0.82 | 0.13 | +0.26 | +0.214 |
| Audience breadthHow many people who build technology does it concern? | 0.25 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 0.52 | 0.45 , above the contested threshold | +0.13 | +0.067 |
| Practical relevanceHow useful is it to someone who builds software or tech products? | 0.81 | 0.75 | 0.82 | 0.79 | 0.07 | +0.22 | +0.174 |
| SubstantiatedHow well is it backed? Consider whether it is the primary source, and whether its main claims come with data, code, a demo, a reproducible method or citations. | 0.84 | 0.70 | 0.86 | 0.80 | 0.16 | +0.05 | +0.040 |
| Technical depthHow technically substantive is it? | 0.66 | 0.55 | 0.65 | 0.62 | 0.11 | +0.05 | +0.031 |
| New informationDoes it contain information absent from the stories covered in the last 7 days (list provided)? | 0.89 | 0.70 | 0.98 | 0.86 | 0.28 | +0.05 | +0.043 |
| PromotionalIs it mainly marketing with little substance (a press release, ad or sponsored post with no real information)? A launch post that carries real news is not promotional. | 0.09 | 0.35 | 0.28 | 0.24 | 0.26 | −0.19 | −0.046 |
| OverclaimDo the headline or conclusions claim more than the body supports? | 0.34 | 0.35 | 0.18 | 0.29 | 0.17 | −0.11 | −0.032 |
| Sum of contributions | +0.647 | ||||||
| Claim-check penalty | 0.000 | ||||||
| Total, as published | 0.647 | ||||||
Spread is the highest minus the lowest judge answer. marks a spread above 0.40: the judges disagree, and the story is marked contested.
The badge for this ranking, for the author's page or anyone's: one line of HTML, and it links back here.
<a href="https://rubric.hrih.si/editions/2026-11-03/36/"><img src="https://rubric.hrih.si/badge/2026-11-03/36.svg" alt="Ranked #36 on Rubric, 3 Nov 2026" width="238" height="28"></a>Also covered by
No other coverage was clustered with this story.
Elsewhere
Elsewhere: HN 1 pts, not on front page
Recorded for context only, checked 3 Nov 2026, 05:47 UTC. It played no part in the ranking.