Head to head
Aider vs Lovable
Comparing 5 documented Aider incidents against 3 for Lovable.
What these records show
Aider has the lower average severity among the incidents collected here (4.0 vs 8.7 for Aider and Lovable, from 5 and 3 incidents). These records can't establish which agent is safer: counts reflect how widely each is used and how often people report failures, not a failure rate.
| Metric | Aider | Lovable |
|---|---|---|
| Documented incidents | 5 | 3 |
| Average severity | 4.0 | 8.7 |
| Critical | 0 | 2 |
| High | 0 | 1 |
| Source checked | 2 | 1 |
Severity at a glance
Failure modes
The incidents behind these numbers
Aider
6.0Aider leaks model-provider API keys to child processes spawned via /run, /test, lint commands, and /git4.0Aider's headless `--message` mode silently swallows slash commands (`/model`, `/ask`, `/architect`) and exits 0 having done nothing4.0Aider exits with code 0 after a fatal API connection failure, masking hard failures as successful headless runs3.0Aider's unified-diff coder silently drops the partial-application warning when one hunk succeeds and another fails3.0Aider silently discards a model's correct diff response as "no tracked changes" when it guesses the wrong edit format
Lovable
9.0A broken object-level authorization bug let any free Lovable account pull other users' source code, Supabase credentials and AI chat histories for 48 days before Lovable fixed it9.0Lovable-generated apps shipped without adequate Supabase row-level security, leaving databases readable and writable by anyone (CVE-2025-48757)8.0A security researcher found 16 vulnerabilities — including inverted access-control logic — in a Lovable-generated EdTech app, exposing 18,697 users' records and letting anyone delete accounts or grade exams