We performed a comparison between GitHub and Mend.io based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."GitHub is good for small companies and for personal use."
"The product has a good UI. It's simple and easy to access, and technical help is easily available. The two-factor authentication security is another valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are GitHub are the standard features, they are very useful."
"The most valuable feature is the source code management. It's very helpful and it's a great product."
"During our use of GitHub, we have not encountered any problems and GitHub adds new features frequently."
"You can write the code with AI. But when it comes to implementation, you must upgrade the bits of code that will support this and generate solutions based on that architecture. Then, you need comparable code bits. Therefore, AI can propose how much a specific function can be better optimized. So, AI can help stakeholders reach tasks quicker."
"I use this solution to store my code in a repository so we can manage version control which is useful."
"The initial setup was easy."
"For us, the most valuable tool was open-source licensing analysis."
"The solution boasts a broad range of features and covers much of what an ideal SCA tool should."
"The most valuable feature is the inventory, where it compiles a list of all of the third-party libraries that we have on our estate."
"The most valuable features are the reporting, customizing libraries "In-house, White list, license selection", comparing the products/projects, and License & Copyright resolution."
"We use a lot of open sources with a variety of containers, and the different open sources come with different licenses. Some come with dual licenses, some are risky and some are not. All our three use cases are equally important to us and we found WhiteSource handles them decently."
"With the fix suggestions feature, not only do you get the specific trace back to where the vulnerability is within your code, but you also get fix suggestions."
"The results and the dashboard they provide are good."
"WhiteSource is unique in the scanning of open-source licenses. Additionally, the vulnerabilities aspect of the solution is a benefit. We don't use WhiteSource in the whole organization, but we use it for some projects. There we receive a sense of the vulnerabilities of the open-source components, which improves our security work. The reports are automated which is useful."
"The project management sector really needs some improvement for GitHub. I don't know if GitHub made sense for me as a project manager."
"It would be better if the amount of storage were increased."
"The initial setup and implementation could be easier, I had some difficulties with it at first but I don't have a development background."
"I think it would be valuable to have more security. Some of the data is very open to everyone."
"GitHub could add more security features. I am not sure how secure it is. If they provide more security features, then it can be used in more official applications."
"It is difficult to merge a code or restore it to an older version."
"There is a bit of a learning curve."
"GitHub needs to improve its UI."
"We have been looking at how we could improve the automation to human involvement ratio from 60:40 to 70:30, or even potentially 80:20, as there is room for improvement here. We are discussing this internally and with Mend; they are very accommodating to us. We think they openly receive our feedback and do their best to implement our thoughts into the roadmap."
"The only thing that I don't find support for on Mend Prioritize is C++."
"The UI is not that friendly and you need to learn how to navigate easily."
"WhiteSource needs improvement in the scanning of the containers and images with distinguishing the layers."
"WhiteSource Prioritize should be expanded to cover more than Java and JavaScript."
"The turnaround time for upgrading databases for this tool as well as the accuracy could be improved."
"They're working on a UI refresh. That's probably been one of the pain points for us as it feels like a really old application."
"We have ended our relationship with WhiteSource. We were using an agent that we built in the pipeline so that you can scan the projects during build time. But unfortunately, that agent didn't work at all. We have more than 500 projects, and it doubled or tripled the build time. For other projects, we had the failure of the builds without any known reason. It was not usable at all. We spent maybe one year working on the issues to try to make it work, but it didn't in the end. We should be able to integrate it with ID and Shift Left so that the developers are able to see the scan results without waiting for the build to fail."
GitHub is ranked 12th in Application Security Tools with 74 reviews while Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews. GitHub is rated 8.6, while Mend.io is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Fortify on Demand, Bitbucket and Atlassian SourceTree, whereas Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Veracode, Snyk and Checkmarx One. See our GitHub vs. Mend.io report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
