We performed a comparison between GitHub Advanced Security 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."It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part."
"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."
"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"The dashboard view and the management view are most valuable."
"It gives us full visibility into what we're using, what needs to be updated, and what's vulnerable, which helps us make better decisions."
"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."
"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 vulnerability, we usually get a dedicated email from our R&D team saying that this particular vulnerability has been exploited in the world, and we should definitely check our project for this and take corrective actions."
"Enables scanning/collecting third-party libraries and classifying license types. In this way we ensure our third-party software policy is followed."
"The license management of WhiteSource was at a good level. As compared to other tools that I have used, its functionality for the licenses for the code libraries was quite good. Its UI was also fine."
"Attribution and license due diligence reports help us with aggregating the necessary data that we, in turn, have to provide to satisfy the various licenses copyright and component usage disclosures in our software."
"The solution boasts a broad range of features and covers much of what an ideal SCA tool should."
"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
"The report limitations are the main issue."
"There could be DST features included in the product."
"WhiteSource only produces a report, which is nice to look at. However, you have to check that report every week, to see if something was found that you don't want. It would be great if the build that's generating a report would fail if it finds a very important vulnerability, for instance."
"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."
"Mend lets you create custom policies. They're not too complicated to set up, but it would be helpful if they had some preconfigured policies to match what we have in Azure DevOps. That would save us a lot of time. It's tedious to configure the policies manually, and I lack the capacity to do it right now. Other products have preconfigured packs and templates, and Mend doesn't."
"The turnaround time for upgrading databases for this tool as well as the accuracy could be improved."
"I would like to see the static analysis included with the open-source version."
"If anything, I would spend more time making this more user-friendly, better documenting the CLI, and adding more examples to help expand the current documentation."
"The UI is not that friendly and you need to learn how to navigate easily."
"The only thing that I don't find support for on Mend Prioritize is C++."
GitHub Advanced Security is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 6 reviews while Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews. GitHub Advanced Security is rated 9.0, while Mend.io is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GitHub Advanced Security writes "A tool that provides ease of integration with the set of existing codes in an infrastructure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". GitHub Advanced Security is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode and Fortify on Demand, whereas Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Veracode, Snyk and Checkmarx One. See our GitHub Advanced Security 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.