Overview
Supabase and Firebase are the two most popular backend-as-a-service platforms for AI-generated applications. Both provide database, authentication, storage, and real-time features. Their security models differ significantly: Supabase uses PostgreSQL Row Level Security (RLS), while Firebase uses Security Rules. Both require explicit configuration to be secure.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Supabase | Firebase |
|---|---|---|
| Database | PostgreSQL | Firestore (NoSQL) |
| Access control | Row Level Security (SQL) | Security Rules (JSON) |
| Auth | Supabase Auth | Firebase Auth |
| Storage security | Storage policies | Storage Rules |
| Self-hosting | Yes | No |
| Open source | Yes | No |
| AI tool integration | Lovable, many others | Some AI tools |
Security Analysis
Supabase security model: Uses PostgreSQL RLS policies written in SQL. Policies are powerful and flexible but require SQL knowledge. The anon key is public by design – security relies entirely on RLS policies. Without RLS, all data is publicly accessible.
Firebase security model: Uses declarative Security Rules in a JSON-like syntax. Rules apply to document paths and can reference auth state. Firestore has no default security – rules must be explicitly written. The Firebase SDK exposes project configuration publicly.
Common AI code issues: Both platforms are insecure by default when used by AI generators. LLMs rarely generate proper RLS policies (Supabase) or Security Rules (Firebase). The most common vulnerability in both is unrestricted data access due to missing access control configuration.
Verdict
Both are equally secure when properly configured and equally vulnerable when not. Supabase’s SQL-based RLS is more flexible for complex access patterns. Firebase’s Security Rules are easier to learn for simple cases. For AI-generated apps, both require manual security configuration that AI tools rarely generate correctly. Choose based on your database preference (SQL vs NoSQL) rather than security.