GitHub Code Scanning vs Harness comparison

"The solution helps identify vulnerabilities by understanding how ports communicate with applications running on a system. Ports are like house numbers; to visit someone's house, you must know their number. Similarly, ports are used to communicate with applications. For example, if you want to use an HTTP web server, you must use port 80. It is the port on which the web application or your server listens for incoming requests."

"GitHub Code Spaces brings significant value with its simplicity and ease of use."

"We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management."

"Harness starts integrating with organizations, making everything automated without the need for manual interruption."

"It's a highly customizable DevOps tool."

"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place."

"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place, making it convenient."

"One area for improvement could be the ability to have an AI system digest the reports generated from code scanning and provide a summary. Currently, the reports can be extensive, and users may overlook details, such as outdated libraries, which could be highlighted for attention."

"GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates."

"I prefer the previous less compact UI version of Harness, which showed more details on the screen."

"When integrating Harness with more than twenty applications in one place, it becomes less stable, causing improvements to be necessary."

"Even with automation, there's a requirement for manual change requests for approvals."

"There's also room for improvement in debugging pipeline issues, which can sometimes become complex."

"The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month."

"GitHub Code Scanning is a moderately priced solution."