Supabase
Neon

Supabase vs Neon Security

Supabase and Neon are both PostgreSQL-based platforms that have become popular with modern web developers. While Supabase offers a complete Backend-as-a-Service with authentication and realtime features, Neon focuses on being a serverless PostgreSQL database with branching capabilities. Both support Row Level Security, but their ecosystems differ.

Get Starter Scan

Security Comparison

Category
Supabase
Neon
Row Level Security
Full RLS with comprehensive tooling, policies via dashboard or SQL
Full PostgreSQL RLS support, pure SQL configuration
Auth Integration
Built-in Supabase Auth, auth.uid() in RLS policies
No built-in auth, must integrate external auth provider
Key Management
Anon key (public) + service_role key (secret) model
Connection strings with standard PostgreSQL credentials
Realtime Security
RLS applies to realtime subscriptions automatically
No built-in realtime, use external solutions
Branching Security
Branch environments available, separate credentials
Database branching with isolated credentials per branch
Serverless Model
Always-on with connection pooling
Scale-to-zero, cold starts, connection pooling

The Verdict

Supabase provides a more complete security solution with integrated auth and RLS that work together seamlessly. Neon offers pure PostgreSQL with excellent branching for development workflows but requires you to bring your own auth solution. For vibe-coded apps using tools like Lovable, Supabase's integrated approach is typically easier to secure correctly.

Choose Supabase if you want integrated auth + RLS that work together out of the box - this is the most common setup for vibe-coded apps. Choose Neon if you need advanced branching workflows or prefer to manage auth separately. Either way, enable RLS on all tables and write proper policies before going to production.

Industry Security Context

When comparing Supabase vs Neon, consider these broader security trends.

10.3%

of Lovable applications (170 out of 1,645) had exposed user data in the CVE-2025-48757 incident

Source: CVE-2025-48757 security advisory

91%

of data breaches involve databases with misconfigured access controls

Source: Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report

4.45 million USD

average cost of a data breach in 2023

Source: IBM Cost of a Data Breach Report 2023

Vibe coding your way to a production codebase is clearly risky. Most of the work we do as software engineers involves evolving existing systems, where the quality and understandability of the underlying code is crucial.

Simon WillisonSecurity Researcher, Django Co-creator

Using Supabase or Neon?

Regardless of which platform you choose, VAS scans for security issues specific to your stack.

Start Security Scan

Frequently Asked Questions

Which database is easier to secure for beginners?

Supabase is generally easier to secure for beginners because auth and RLS are integrated. You can reference auth.uid() directly in RLS policies without additional setup. Neon requires you to set up external authentication and figure out how to pass user context to RLS policies, which adds complexity.

Do both platforms support the same RLS features?

Yes, both run PostgreSQL and support identical RLS features. The difference is ecosystem integration. Supabase provides auth.uid() and auth.jwt() functions that work seamlessly with Supabase Auth. On Neon, you'll need to set up session variables or use a different approach to pass user identity to RLS policies.

Which is better for development with database branching?

Neon has more mature database branching with instant copy-on-write branches and isolated credentials. This is great for preview deployments. Supabase offers branching too but it's newer. Both keep branch credentials separate from production, which is good security practice.

Can VAS check RLS on both platforms?

VAS tests deployed applications regardless of the underlying database. For Supabase apps, we directly test RLS by querying the database through the API. For Neon, we test through your application's API endpoints. The testing approach may differ, but we can verify access control on both platforms.