Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

GitHub Advanced Security vs Mend.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
The GitHub Advanced Security team provides responsive support, generally rated highly, but time zone differences affect service for Indian companies.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
4.1
GitHub Advanced Security needs enhanced reporting, integration, guidelines, and language compatibility for improved usability and vulnerability management.
No sentiment score available
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
GitHub Advanced Security efficiently scales for enterprises, supporting seamless onboarding and deployment across varying organization sizes.
No sentiment score available
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.7
GitHub Advanced Security is praised for reliability, stability, serverless architecture, and minimal downtime, with manageable workflow analysis challenges.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.1
GitHub Advanced Security provides customizable security features, integration, and insights at a low cost, enhancing developer experience and protection.
No sentiment score available
 

Categories and Ranking

GitHub Advanced Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
15th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Mend.io
Ranking in Application Security Tools
17th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (7th), Static Code Analysis (4th), Software Supply Chain Security (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitHub Advanced Security is 7.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mend.io is 3.3%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SirinatPaphatsirinatthi - PeerSpot reviewer
Initial setup was very easy, scalable product and stable product
We keep our firewall security in place. Customers use GitHub because they don't want to coordinate with many tools.  GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need For customers,…
Jeffrey Harker - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up
Finding vulnerabilities is pretty easy. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) does a great job of that and we had quite a few when we first put this in place. Governance up until that time had been manual and when we tried to do manual governance of a large codebase, our chances of success were pretty minimal. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) does a very good job of finding the open-source, checking the versions, and making sure they're secure. They notify us of critical high, medium, and low impacts, and if anything is wrong. We find the product very easy to use and we use it as a core part of our strategy for scanning product code moving toward release. We use Mend (formerly WhiteSource) Smart Fix. I’d say pretty much everything in Mend (formerly WhiteSource) is easy to use. We really don't have too much difficulty using the product at all. I've implemented other scanners and tools and had much more trouble with those products than we've ever had with Mend (formerly WhiteSource). That’s extremely important. It's hard to sell to some of these teams to put any level of overhead on top of their product development efforts and the fact that Mend (formerly WhiteSource) is as easy as it is to use is a critical aspect of adoption here. It scores very highly on that scale. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) Smart Fix helps our developers fix vulnerable transitive dependencies. It's all very helpful to our development community. First of all, we're able to find that there are issues. Second of all, we're able to figure out very quickly what needs to be done to remediate the issues. Mend (formerly WhiteSource) helped reduce our mean time to resolution since adopting it. A lot of it is process improvement and technical aspects that can tell us how to go about remediating the issues. We get that out of Mend (formerly WhiteSource). Making the developers aware that these issues are there and insisting they be corrected and making the effort to do that visibly is very valuable to us. Overall, Mend (formerly WhiteSource) helped dramatically reduce the number of open-source software vulnerabilities running in our production at any given point in time. I won't give metrics, however, it's fair to say that our state before and after Mend (formerly WhiteSource) is dramatically different and moved in a positive direction. Mend's ability to integrate our developer's existing workflows, including their IDE repository and CI is good. Azure DevOps is really important. That's what the pipelines are. That's a very important piece of the entire puzzle. If this was just an external scanner where periodically we'd go through and scan our repos and give them a report, we’d do that with pen testing products, for example, for security testing. The problem is, by the time they get those reports, they've already shipped the code to multiple environments and it's too late to stop the train. With these features being baked into the pipelines like this, they know immediately. As a result, we're able to quickly take action to remediate findings.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitHub Advanced Security?
It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part.
What needs improvement with GitHub Advanced Security?
Maybe make it compatible with more programming languages. Have a customized ruleset where the end-user can create their own rules for scanning. Also, support for container stuff, like when the code...
What is your primary use case for GitHub Advanced Security?
I use it for Azure DevOps, for example. This tool focuses on the security of the code. It performs code analysis to identify security issues, such as hard-coded secrets and passwords, potential SQL...
How does WhiteSource compare with SonarQube?
Red Hat Ceph does well in simplifying storage integration by replacing the need for numerous storage solutions. This solution allows for multiple copies of replicated and coded pools to be kept, ea...
How does WhiteSource compare with Black Duck?
We researched Black Duck but ultimately chose WhiteSource when looking for an application security tool. WhiteSource is a software solution that enables agile open source security and license compl...
What do you like most about Mend.io?
The best feature is that the Mend R&D team does their due diligence for all the vulnerabilities. In case they observe any important or critical vulnerabilities, such as the Log4j-related vulner...
 

Also Known As

No data available
WhiteSource, Mend SCA, Mend.io Supply Chain Defender, Mend SAST
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Microsoft, Autodesk, NCR, Target, IBM, vodafone, Siemens, GE digital, KPMG, LivePerson, Jack Henry and Associates
Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Advanced Security vs. Mend.io and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.