Solutions
Codebase Audit, Takeover & Bug Fixes
We audit an inherited codebase, give you a written report on what we found, fix the critical bugs, and take over maintenance — without guessing at what the previous team intended. This is also how we approach changes on systems that can't afford downtime.
Why a written audit comes first
Taking over someone else's code without understanding it first is how small problems become large ones. The audit exists to separate what's actually broken from what just looks unfamiliar, and to rank what we find by risk — so the first fixes are the ones that matter, not whatever happens to be easiest to find.
Proof this works on systems that can't go down
GreenTruth (EarnDLT), a blockchain-based carbon compliance platform, needed its NestJS backend migrated from GraphQL to REST so third-party data providers could integrate — on a platform already handling live regulatory data under CBAM and Scope 3 reporting, where downtime wasn't an option. We mapped the existing GraphQL queries to REST endpoints, ran both in parallel, validated that the REST layer produced the same results, and cut integrations over gradually over one to two months. No disruption to live reporting. That's the same discipline we bring to any inherited codebase: understand it fully before you touch it, validate before you cut over, and never treat “it’s probably fine” as a plan.
A sample timeline by plan
40 hrs / month
An audit and the critical fixes, then ongoing maintenance on the same 40-hour plan.
80 hrs / month
A deeper audit plus a larger set of fixes, for a codebase with more accumulated issues or an active roadmap on top.
160 hrs / month
Stabilization and active feature development in parallel, for a codebase you need to both rescue and move forward.
Proof from past work
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
What's in the written audit report?
What we found, ranked by risk: security issues, fragile areas likely to break, outdated dependencies, and anything that would surprise you if you didn't already know about it.
Can you take over a codebase while it's live, with real users?
Yes — this is work we've done on systems handling live regulatory data, where downtime wasn't an option. We ran changes alongside the existing system, validated parity, and cut over gradually rather than all at once.
Do you need access to the original developers?
It helps but isn't required. Audits are built to work from the code and documentation that exists, not from institutional knowledge that may have already left with the previous team.
What happens after the audit and critical fixes?
Most clients move to ongoing maintenance on a 40-hour plan. There's no obligation to continue, but the audit is more useful if someone is responsible for acting on it.
How is this different from just hiring a new developer to figure it out?
A new hire has to learn the codebase from scratch, alone, often without a clear picture of what's actually wrong first. The audit gives you that picture up front, in writing, before committing to a fix plan.