We performed a comparison between GitGuardian Platform and Veracode 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."GitGuardian Internal Monitoring has helped increase our secrets detection rate by several orders of magnitude. This is a hard metric to get. For example, if we knew what our secrets were and where they were, we wouldn't need GitGuardian or these types of solutions. There could be a million more secrets that GitGuardian doesn't detect, but it is basically impossible to find them by searching for them."
"GitGuardian has pretty broad detection capabilities. It covers all of the types of secrets that we've been interested in... [Yet] The "detector" concept, which identifies particular categories or types of secrets, allows an organization to tweak and tailor the configuration for things that are specific to its environment. This is highly useful if you're particularly worried about a certain type of secret and it can help focus attention, as part of early remediation efforts."
"It's also worth mentioning that GitGuardian is unique because they have a free tier that we've been using for the first twelve months. It provides full functionality for smaller teams. We're a smaller company and have never changed in size, but we got to the point where we felt the service brought us value, and we want to pay for it. We also wanted an SLA for technical support and whatnot, so we switched to a paid plan. Without that, they had a super-generous, free tier, and I was immensely impressed with it."
"You can also assign tasks to specific teams or people to complete, such as assigning something to the "blue team" or saying that this person needs to do this, and that person needs to do that. That is a great feature because you can actually manage your team internally in GitGuardian."
"I like GitGuardian's instant response. When you have an incident, it's reported immediately. The interface gives you a great overview of your current leaked secrets."
"The breadth of the solution detection capabilities is pretty good. They have good categories and a lot of different types of secrets... it gives us a great range when it comes to types of secrets, and that's good for us."
"The most valuable feature is the general incident reporting system."
"GitGuardian has also helped us develop a security-minded culture. We're serious about shift left and getting better about code security. I think a lot of people are getting more mindful about what a secret is."
"Valuable features for us are the static scanning of the software, which is very important to us; the ability to set policy profiles that are specific to us; the software composition analysis, to give us reports on known vulnerabilities from our third-party components."
"The most important features, I would say, are the scanning abilities and the remediation abilities within the product. Scanning because, obviously, we want to make sure that our application code is flaw-free. And the remediation tools are helpful to the developers to help them track and manage their flaws."
"I contacted the solution's technical support during the automation part, and it went well, after which I never faced any issues."
"We are using the Veracode tools to expose the engineers to the security vulnerabilities that were introduced with the new features, i.e. a lot faster or sooner in the development life cycle."
"Code analysis tool to help identify code issues before entered into production."
"Veracode has good support for microservices, and I also like the sandbox environment. For example, when introducing a new component, we can scan it in a sandbox environment. It will not impact the main environment. When our team fixes it, they. can push it to the production environment when the results are acceptable."
"Veracode has a nice API that they provide to allow for custom things to be built, or automation. We actually have integrated Veracode into our software development cycle using their API. We actually are able to automatically, every time a new build of a software is completed, submit that application, kick off a scan, and we get results in a much more automated fashion."
"It can be very hard to make a good lab environment with a console with log windows and code bases. What I like about Veracode is that they managed to do that. It has a very responsive graphical user interface and has worked very well. I was very pleased with that."
"An area for improvement is the front end for incidents. The user experience in this area could be much better."
"It would be nice if they supported detecting PII or had some kind of data loss prevention feature."
"They could give a developer access to a dashboard for their team's repositories that just shows their repository secrets. I think more could be exposed to developers."
"One improvement that I'd like to see is a cleaner for Splunk logs. It would be nice to have a middle man for anything we send or receive from Splunk forwarders. I'd love to see it get cleaned by GitGuardian or caught to make sure we don't have any secrets getting committed to Splunk logs."
"It could be easier. They have a CLI tool that engineers can run on their laptops, but getting engineers to install the tool is a manual process. I would like to see them have it integrated into one of those developer tools, e.g., VS Code or JetBrains, so developers don't have to think about it."
"Automated Jira tickets would be fantastic. At the moment, I believe we have to go in and click to create a Jira ticket. It would be nice to automate."
"It took us a while to get new patterns introduced into the pattern reporting process."
"We have been somewhat confused by the dashboard at times."
"The interface is too complex."
"There is also a size limit of 100 MB so we cannot upload files that are larger than that. That could be improved. Also, the duration of the scan is a bit too long."
"It could have better integration with our pipeline. If we could have better integration with our application pipeline, e.g., Jira, Bamboo, or Azure DevOps, then that will be very helpful. Right now, it is quite hard to integrate the solution into our existing pipeline."
"Veracode's container scanning could be improved. We containerize all the platforms we use inside a Docker image. For example, we create a Microsoft Docker image that we build our application on top of. I would like Veracode to implement IT scans before we commit the code."
"The scanning could be improved, because some scans take a bit of time."
"Veracode is costly, and there is potential for improvement in its pricing."
"We are testing Veracode's software composition analysis, but we're having trouble integrating it with SVN. It works out of the box when you use Git but doesn't work as well with other tools like SVN. It's more geared toward Git"
"The support team could be more responsive, and the dependency of users on the support team is too high and should be reduced."
GitGuardian Platform is ranked 7th in Application Security Tools with 24 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. GitGuardian Platform is rated 9.0, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GitGuardian Platform writes "It dramatically improved our ability to detect secrets, saved us time, and reduced our mean time to remediation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". GitGuardian Platform is most compared with SonarQube, GitHub Advanced Security, Cycode and Snyk, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our GitGuardian Platform vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
