TL;DR
Cursor is an AI-assisted IDE where you see and control all code. Bolt.new generates complete apps that you may not fully understand. Cursor gives you more security control but requires more expertise. Bolt.new is faster but may generate insecure patterns you don't notice. Both require security review before production deployment.
Fundamental Differences
| Aspect | Cursor | Bolt.new |
|---|---|---|
| Development Model | AI-assisted coding | AI app generation |
| Code Visibility | You see everything | Generated in browser |
| Control Level | Full control | Prompt-based |
| Learning Curve | Requires coding knowledge | Minimal coding needed |
| Security Review | Easier (you wrote it) | Harder (generated code) |
Security Control
Cursor: Direct Control
With Cursor, you're writing code with AI assistance:
- You see every line the AI suggests
- Accept or reject suggestions individually
- Understand the code because you're building it
- Can apply your security knowledge during development
- Full access to configure security from the start
Bolt.new: Generated Code
Bolt.new creates complete applications from prompts:
- Entire app generated from natural language
- May not understand all the generated code
- Security depends on AI's default patterns
- Need to review generated code carefully
- Can iterate with prompts to fix issues
Bolt.new Risk: When you don't understand the code, you might miss security issues. Generated apps often lack proper authentication, input validation, or RLS configurations by default.
Common Security Issues
| Issue | Cursor | Bolt.new |
|---|---|---|
| Exposed API Keys | You control placement | May be in frontend code |
| Missing Auth | You implement it | Often not included |
| No Input Validation | Add as you code | Frequently missing |
| Supabase RLS | Configure yourself | Usually disabled |
| CORS Issues | You configure | Often too permissive |
Security Review Difficulty
Cursor Projects
Reviewing Cursor-built apps is straightforward because:
- You wrote (or accepted) every line
- Architecture decisions were yours
- You know where sensitive operations happen
- Git history shows your changes
Bolt.new Projects
Reviewing generated apps requires more effort:
- Must understand code you didn't write
- AI may use unfamiliar patterns
- Security issues scattered throughout
- May need multiple prompt iterations to fix
Recommendation: If using Bolt.new, export your code and review it carefully before deploying. Use security scanners to catch common vulnerabilities.
Deployment Considerations
| Deployment Aspect | Cursor | Bolt.new |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment Control | Full control (your choice) | Built-in deployment |
| Environment Variables | You configure | May need reconfiguration |
| Security Headers | You set up | Usually missing |
| Production Readiness | Depends on your setup | Prototype-level |
Which Should You Choose?
Choose Cursor If:
You have coding experience, want full security control, are building production applications, or need to meet compliance requirements. Cursor lets you apply security best practices as you build.
Choose Bolt.new If:
You're prototyping ideas, learning to code, or building internal tools with limited security needs. Always plan to review and harden generated code before any production use.
Is Bolt.new safe for production apps?
Bolt.new generates functional code, but it's designed for rapid prototyping. Production apps need security review, proper authentication, environment variable management, and database security configuration that isn't included by default.
Can I improve Bolt.new security with prompts?
Yes, you can prompt for security features: "Add authentication using Supabase Auth" or "Enable RLS on all tables." However, you still need to verify the generated security code is correct.
Which is better for learning secure coding?
Cursor is better for learning because you see how security is implemented. With Bolt.new, security (if present) is abstracted away. Using Cursor with AI explanations helps you understand why security patterns matter.