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 ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"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."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"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."
"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."
"Mend has reduced our open-source software vulnerabilities and helped us remediate issues quickly. My company's policy is to ensure that vulnerabilities are fixed before it gets to production."
"The inventory management as well as the ability to identify security vulnerabilities has been the most valuable for our business."
"The dashboard view and the management view are most valuable."
"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."
"The vulnerability analysis is the best aspect of the solution."
"The solution is scalable."
"There could be DST features included in the product."
"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."
"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 report limitations are the main issue."
"It would be good if it can do dynamic code analysis. It is not necessarily in that space, but it can do more because we have too many tools. Their partner relationship support is a little bit confusing. They haven't really streamlined the support process when we buy through a reseller. They should improve their process."
"I would like to see the static analysis included with the open-source version."
"Some detected libraries do not specify a location of where in the source they were matched from, which is something that should be enhanced to enable quicker troubleshooting."
"At times, the latency of getting items out of the findings after they're remediated is higher than it should be."
"WhiteSource Prioritize should be expanded to cover more than Java and JavaScript."
"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."
"Needs better ACL and more role definitions. This product could be used by large organisations and it definitely needs a better role/action model."
"We specifically use this solution within our CICD pipelines in Azure DevOps, and we would like to have a gate so that if the score falls below a certain value then we can block the pipeline from running."
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, Snyk, Veracode 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.
