Contrast Security Assess vs GitHub comparison

Read 97 GitHub reviews

3,549 Views
2,094 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 19, 2025

GitHub and Contrast Security Assess serve distinct purposes in the tech ecosystem with GitHub focusing on code hosting and collaboration, whereas Contrast Security Assess specializes in security vulnerability assessment. GitHub seems to have the upper hand in project management and collaboration, while Contrast Security Assess leads in robust security features.

Features: GitHub is valued for integrated version control, seamless collaboration tools, and its user-friendly interface. Contrast Security Assess provides real-time vulnerability detection, integration with CI/CD pipelines, and interactive application security testing.

Room for Improvement: GitHub could improve its built-in security features and perhaps streamline some aspects of DevOps integration. Users also desire enhanced code review functionalities. Contrast Security Assess could benefit from simplifying its deployment process and expanding its user onboarding experience. Customers also wish for a broader set of APIs to enhance integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: GitHub offers a straightforward deployment process and accessible customer service for all users, making repository creation and collaboration easy. Contrast Security Assess presents a complex installation due to specialized security integrations but offsets this with responsive support during setup.

Pricing and ROI: GitHub has a generally lower setup cost, presenting a favorable ROI, especially for collaborative coding environments. In contrast, Contrast Security Assess requires a higher initial investment due to specialized security features but provides significant ROI for organizations focused on security insights.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. GitHub Report (Updated: December 2025).

Contrast Security Assess vs. GitHub

Download the complete report

Helped 879,425 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Application Security Tools

30th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th)

GitHub

Ranking in Application Security Tools

4th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Version Control (3rd), Agile and DevOps Services (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
GitHub	1.1%
Contrast Security Assess	1.1%
Other	97.8%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer1605099

Director of Threat and Vulnerability Management at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications

The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of. Assess also provides the option of helping developers incorporate security elements while they're writing code. It depends on whether individual developers decide to utilize the information that's provided to them from the solution, but it definitely gives them visibility into more environments. It gives them an opportunity to remediate vulnerabilities well before production deployments.

Read full review

Murathan OK

Software Development Manager at a media company with 10,001+ employees

CI/CD workflows have become streamlined and AI support has improved collaborative development

We are using GitHub because it is open-source software, which is the most valuable solution for us. The open source and community support are very good. We are always up-to-date with the community, and integration difficulty is very low. If you integrate any CI/CD solutions on GitHub, it's very easy. We started using GitHub about three months ago with AI integration. For our deployments, some developers can be very shy about asking for descriptions on their commits. We are using AI support for comments and deployment management, which is beautiful. We are not using the GitHub API for automating workflows in our projects. I give GitHub a five-star rating for the review capabilities. I also give GitHub five stars for integration with third-party applications. There is a lot of integration available on GitHub. If you want to integrate something, even if it could be integrated before GitHub, you can make your code and integrate your own in-house applications. It's a very easy and powerful aspect of GitHub.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"I'm able to access any repository that I like, whether it's public or private."

"The tool also helps organize collaboration by allowing users to share a repository with other developers."

"GitHub is easy, secure, and widely documented."

"It is really simple to set up."

"This solution is just easy to use."

"GitHub is convenient and easy to use."

"GitHub allows us the option to push files from a non-UA method or directly upload files from the UA. You can integrate GitHub with Jenkins to do CI/CD."

"The most valuable features are GitHub are the standard features, they are very useful."

More GitHub pros

Cons

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"Our firewall was blocking cloning and downloading with SSH."

"Regarding improvements, I preferred the tool's earlier pricing model, which limited storage and the number of repositories instead of the number of users, which was more convenient from a customer perspective. I've also experienced issues with GitHub servers being unable to support moving repositories, which caused problems. For basic plans, no support was available to help resolve these issues. I think GitHub should provide more support for smaller businesses to help with these problems."

"GitHub could expand the limits of the free version."

"Github needs more storage."

"The solution can improve by adding video guides, official guides, or short courses that cater to beginners who are new to the system. These resources could offer step-by-step guidance on how to use GitHub, including common procedures such as pulling and committing. Currently, many of us have to resort to searching for information on how to do these tasks via Google. An official guide provided by GitHub itself would be a valuable asset to newcomers and would save them time and effort."

"When I was new, I faced challenges with Git commands, such as reversing or deleting mistakes."

"I would like to see more security where a plugin was available for us to update in relation to security."

"The documentation needs to be more concise and easier for developers to understand."

More GitHub cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"The solution is expensive."

"If there are only 10 people using a particular repository, then GitHub is free. But if we increase the number of users, we need to pay the normal charge for GitHub."

"We pay a subscription-based yearly licensing fee for the solution."

"There are no licensing fees for the features that we use."

"The private repositories are free, which is very good."

"We are currently paying nothing for GitHub."

"We pay a licensing fee for GitHub, which could be cheaper."

"We have an enterprise licensing agreement, and I am not part of the finance department so I can't say how much it costs."

"You don't have to pay for a license if you are using the free version."

More GitHub pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,425 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	42
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	49

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about GitHub?

The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub?

I was paying approximately one hundred dollars annually about a year ago. I am uncertain of the current cost, but GitHub without Copilot is free as far as I know. I am not paying anything for my Gi...

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitHub?

Security could make GitHub better. OWASP Top Ten security advisors could be integrated on GitHub, and it could provide checks and advice. That would be much better. Additionally, LLM integration on...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 12% of the time

SonarQube vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

Seeker Interactive vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Bitbucket vs GitHub

Compared 10% of the time

Snyk vs GitHub

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs GitHub

Compared 7% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs GitHub

Compared 6% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs GitHub

Compared 6% of the time

More GitHub Competitors

Product Reports

Contrast Security Assess

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Download GitHub product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

No data available

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

GitHub is a web-based Git repository hosting service. It offers all of the distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, and wikis for every project.

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Dominion Enterprises, NASA, Braintree, SAP, CyberAgent

Contrast Security Assess vs. GitHub