We performed a comparison between Code42 Incydr and GitGuardian Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has quite a bit of flexibility in configuring backup sets."
"There are a couple of things. One of them is that they have what they call Incydr. Their detection and response solution to the insider threat area is called Incydr. That gives visibility to the clients that have widely dispersed employee bases due to work from home, or that had a dispersed workforce predating any of the work from home requirements. Even though they might not be inside the organization physically, they're inside the organization. It allows us to get some visibility into what people are doing, what the context is, and how to control what might be the potential for intellectual property theft or file exposure."
"Security tools: Being able to monitor data going in and coming off our endpoints. Seeing what it is and where it's going is awesome."
"The solution is very stable. Very rarely do we have any issues with it. We don't have to deal with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it to be reliable."
"Works in the background and users are able to perform restores."
"Low system overhead, setting retention policies, ease of use"
"t has a very user friendly status bar with common errors and has logs built in to the console so we can review the issues or status of CrashPlan."
"Backup and recovery have been great, but I love having the ability to keep the hybrid type build which they offer."
"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."
"GitGuardian has many features that fit our use cases. We have our internal policies on secret exposure, and our code is hosted on GitLab, so we need to prevent secrets from reaching GitLab because our customers worry that GitLab is exposed. One of the great features is the pre-receive hook. It prevents commits from being pushed to the repository by activating the hook on the remotes, which stops the developers from pushing to the remote. The secrets don't reach GitLab, and it isn't exposed."
"The secrets detection and alerting is the most important feature. We get alerted almost immediately after someone commits a secret. It has been very accurate, allowing us to jump on it right away, then figure out if we have something substantial that has been leaked or whether it is something that we don't have to worry about. This general main feature of the app is great."
"The entire GitGuardian solution is valuable. The product is doing its job and showing us many things. We get many false positives, but the ability to automatically display potential leaks when developers commit is valuable. The dashboards show you recent and historical commits, and we have a full scan that shows historical leaked secrets."
"When they give you a description of what happened, it's really easy to follow and to retest. And the ability to retest is something that you don't have in other solutions. If a secret was detected, you can retest if it is still there. It will show you if it is in the history."
"It actually creates an incident ticket for us. We can now go end-to-end after a secret has been identified, to track down who owns the repository and who is responsible for cleaning it up."
"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."
"Presently, we find the pre-commit hooks more useful."
"What I think could be improved is how I get support."
"I would like to see more flexibility on privileges, perhaps create another kind of admin for regions. Also, I would like the ability to access logs without having to be on the actual device or a super-admin."
"More security would be nice, I would love to be able to remotely brick a stolen laptop and it's hard disk drive (HDD)."
"Reporting could use an overhaul. It is very limited."
"I think one we can improve is the compression."
"Java, please get rid of Java."
"The application, written in Java, required far more system resources on a Client than other solutions."
"There doesn't seem to be any feature that is lacking."
"GitGuardian encompasses many secrets that companies might have, but we are a Microsoft-only organization, so there are some limitations there in terms of their honey tokens. I'd like for it to not be limited to Amazon-based tokens. It would be nice to see a broader set of providers that you could pick from."
"We have encountered occasional difficulties with the Single Sign-On process."
"There is room for improvement in GitGuardian on Azure DevOps. The implementation is a bit hard there. This is one of the things we requested help with. I would not say their support is not good, but they need them to improve in helping customers on that side."
"The purchasing process is convoluted compared to Snyk, the other tool we use. It's like night and day because you only need to punch in your credit card, and you're set. With GitGuardian, getting a quote took two or three weeks. We paid for it in December but have not settled that payment yet."
"Right now, we are waiting for improvement in the RBAC support for GitGuardian."
"There is room for improvement in its integration for bug-tracking. It should be more direct. They have invested a lot in user management, but they need to invest in integrations. That is a real lack."
"An area for improvement is the front end for incidents. The user experience in this area could be much better."
"GitGuardian's hook and dashboard scanners are the two entities. They should work together as one. We've seen several discrepancies where the hook is not being flagged on the dashboard. I still think they need to do some fine-tuning around that. We don't want to waste time."
Code42 Incydr is ranked 15th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 78 reviews while GitGuardian Platform is ranked 6th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 21 reviews. Code42 Incydr is rated 9.0, while GitGuardian Platform is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Code42 Incydr writes "Provides comprehensive visibility and protection, helps in identifying the gaps in security, and comes with excellent onboarding support". On the other hand, 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". Code42 Incydr is most compared with Threat Detection, Investigation & Response (TDIR) Platform, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Morphisec and Backup and Restore for SharePoint & Microsoft Office 365, whereas GitGuardian Platform is most compared with SonarQube, Cycode, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk and Veracode. See our Code42 Incydr vs. GitGuardian Platform report.
See our list of best Data Loss Prevention (DLP) vendors.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) 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.
