We performed a comparison between GitLab and Kiuwan 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 scalable."
"We like that we can have an all-encompassing product and don't have to implement different solutions."
"This is a scalable solution. We had around 200 users working with it."
"The code merging capability is something that we use very frequently."
"I have had no problem with the stability of the solution."
"We like that we can create branches and then the branches can be reviewed and you can mesh those branches back. You can independently work with your own branch, you don't need to really control the core of other people."
"I like GitLab's security and SAS tools."
"CI/CD and GitLab scanning are the most valuable features."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"I would like configuration of a YML file to be done via UI rather than a code file."
"Some of the scripts that we encountered in GitLab were not fully functional and threw up errors."
"The solution could be faster."
"There is room for improvement in GitLab Agents."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly. We do most of our operations through the website interface but it could be better."
"The initial setup was quite challenging because it takes some time to understand how to pull out or push the code."
"We'd like to see better integration with the Atlassian ecosystem."
"The solution does not have many built-in functions or variables so scripting is required."
"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
GitLab is ranked 7th in Application Security Tools with 70 reviews while Kiuwan is ranked 22nd in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Kiuwan is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kiuwan writes "Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, SonarQube, AWS CodePipeline and Tekton, whereas Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Snyk, Veracode and Fortify on Demand. See our GitLab vs. Kiuwan report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
