For the WebAIM Community
Code that serves everyone should be secure for everyone.
We scan, then we forget. You keep what you want.
You already hold your work to a higher bar than most. You write semantic HTML, label every control, test with a screen reader, and review other people's markup against WCAG because you know real people depend on getting it right. Security deserves the same discipline. The same form you carefully made accessible still talks to a database, still handles input, still runs JavaScript — and an injection flaw or an XSS hole harms the very users you work hardest to include. AllScanTool brings that second-set-of-eyes review to the security layer: paste your HTML, ARIA, form handlers, or back-end code and the Delivery-Layer Engine flags SQL injection, XSS, hardcoded credentials, and insecure functions, with the line number and a fix. It runs in your browser and forgets your code when you leave. No logs. No storage. No retention. Your code stays private.
You review code for accessibility. Review it for security the same way.
Accessibility and security are both about not failing the person on the other end of the screen. These are the moments where the same careful eye belongs on the security layer.
An accessible form is still an input you must trust carefully
You labeled it, wired the ARIA, made it keyboard-friendly — and it still passes user data to a database. Accessibility and injection safety are separate checks, and both matter.
ARIA live regions and dynamic content can carry XSS
Code that injects status messages or dynamic content into the page for assistive tech can also inject untrusted markup. Helpful for screen readers, risky if the content is not escaped.
You review other people's markup — now review their logic
Auditing a client's templates for WCAG puts you in front of their form handlers and scripts too. A quick scan tells you whether what you are signing off on is also secure.
Sample widgets copied for their a11y, not their safety
You adopt a date picker or modal because its accessibility is solid. Its data handling and event code may not have had the same scrutiny.
Demo keys left in accessible prototypes
Reference implementations and CodePen demos built to show correct ARIA often ship with hardcoded test keys that follow the snippet into production.
Inclusion means protecting users, end to end
The users you advocate for are also the ones harmed by a breach. Secure code is part of building software that genuinely serves everyone.
Ask AST
The questions accessibility-minded developers ask when the markup is right and they want the logic behind it to be just as sound.
QI built this form to be fully accessible — how do I confirm the way it handles input is also secure?
Paste the form and its handler into AST. It checks how the submitted data reaches your database and whether it is properly parameterized, then flags any injection risk with the exact line and the safe version.
QMy code injects live status messages for screen readers — could that introduce an XSS risk?
It can if the message content is not escaped. AST detects values written into the page that could carry untrusted markup and shows you how to render them safely without breaking the live region.
QI'm auditing a client site for WCAG and I'm also seeing their form logic — can I check that too?
Yes. Paste the back-end and script code alongside your accessibility review. AST surfaces injection, XSS, and hardcoded secrets so your audit can speak to security as well as compliance.
QI adopted an accessible widget from a reference example — is its underlying code safe to ship?
AST scans the widget's scripts and data handling for insecure functions, unescaped output, and leftover demo keys, so the component you chose for its accessibility is also clean under the hood.