Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Entro Security vs GitGuardian Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 28, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Entro Security
Ranking in Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM)
2nd
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
GitGuardian Platform
Ranking in Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (4th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (6th), Software Supply Chain Security (4th), DevSecOps (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) category, the mindshare of Entro Security is 11.1%. The mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 0.1%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM)
 

Featured Reviews

YL
We get improved visibility and excellent support but require better detection of custom data
Reduction in the attack surface is the main benefit. We have not worked with it much yet, but so far, it has been good. It can be improved a bit more in the future, but so far, we have just scratched the surface with Entro Security. Entro Security has helped develop a better culture among developers. They are willing and starting to use something called Vault to store credentials, and they even do it without us telling them. In the past, they used to post everything like in ClearText, whereas now, they are voluntarily migrating the information to Vault. I am pretty sure it is because Entro Security is also annoying them. Every time there is a finding, we ping them via Slack. The ping comes from Entro itself. They do not want to be bothered by messages. They do not want to be seen as a bad employee, so they are using it on their own. It is not hard for us to establish behavioral baselines for non-human identities (NHI) in Entro Security. It is important that Entro Security’s detection and mitigation of NHI threats is done in real-time. It is becoming a worldwide issue, not only in our company. So many companies are trying to solve this issue where developers are posting credentials in plain text. It is of very high priority. It is not critical, but it is highly important. Entro Security has improved visibility, revealing the extent of our credential issues, where strong credentials like admin accounts were found in plaintext in numerous projects. We have more visibility and control. We got to know that the issue was much bigger than we thought. We thought that only one out of ten projects would have some kind of password, but we found more than five to seven projects having plain text credentials. The credentials stored were of strong accounts. They had put admin account information in plain text. We did not think it would be this severe. We thought that, at worst, they would be some maintainer credentials, but they were using full admin credentials in their code and had put them just in plain text. Entro Security has helped improve our organization’s security posture. Entro Security has decreased our exposure to risk. It reduces exposure from the inside, not from the outside.
Ney Roman - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates efficient secret management and improves development processes
Regarding the exceptions in GitGuardian Platform, we know that within the platform we have a way to accept a path or a directory from a repository, but it is not that visible at the very beginning. You have to figure out where to search for it, and once you have it, it is really good, but it is not that visible at the beginning. This should be made more exposed. The documentation could be better because it was not that comprehensively documented. When we started working with GitGuardian Platform, it was difficult to find some specific use cases, and we were not aware of that. It might have improved now, but at that time, it was not something we would recommend.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The top features of Entro Security that stand out are its ease of onboarding and discovery."
"They are very helpful and responsive. They acknowledge issues, take feedback seriously, and implement features based on user requests."
"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."
"GitGuardian public leak detection significantly enhances our organization's data security by continuously monitoring public repositories."
"GitGuardian Platform has helped save significant time for the security team by eliminating the need to seek out development teams and work with them on exposed secrets, as much of this is now handled proactively."
"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."
"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."
"The majority of our incidents for critical detectors and important secret types are remediated automatically or proactively by developers through GitGuardian's notification system, without security team involvement."
"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."
"What is particularly helpful is that having GitGuardian show that the code failed a check enables us to automatically pass the resolution to the author. We don't have to rely on the reviewer to assign it back to him or her. Letting the authors solve their own problems before they get to the reviewer has significantly improved visibility and reduced the remediation time from multiple days to minutes or hours. Given how time-consuming code reviews can be, it saves some of our more scarce resources."
 

Cons

"Entro Security could benefit from improvements in IAM control to allow segregation of duties among developers."
"The detection of generic content or custom data specific to our company needs improvement. It has trouble detecting unique patterns of secrets."
"We have been somewhat confused by the dashboard at times."
"For some repositories, there are a lot of incidents. For example, one repository says 255 occurrences, so I assume these are 255 alerts and nobody is doing anything about them. These could be false positives. However, I cannot assess it correctly, because I haven't been closing these false positives myself. From the dashboard, I can see that for some of the repositories, there have been a lot of closing of these occurrences, so I would assume there are a lot of false positives. A ballpark estimate would be 60% being false positives. One of the arguments from the developers against this tool is the number of false positives."
"There has been a little bit of downtime of late, and it has been reasonably impactful when it's not been scanning."
"The analytics in GitGuardian Platform have a significant opportunity to better reflect the value provided to security teams and demonstrate actual activity occurring. While the self-healing capability and proactive developer actions are important features, the analytics do not provide information around this activity."
"Right now, we are waiting for improvement in the RBAC support for GitGuardian."
"The main thing for me is the customization for some of the healthcare-specific identifiers that we want to validate. There should be some ability, which is coming in the near future, to have custom identifiers. Being in healthcare, we have pretty specific patterns that we need to match for PHI or PII. Having that would add a little bit extra to it."
"We have encountered occasional difficulties with the Single Sign-On process."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It could be cheaper. When GitHub secrets monitoring solution goes to general access and general availability, GitGuardian might be in a little bit of trouble from the competition, and maybe then they might lower their prices. The GitGuardian solution is great. I'm just concerned that they're not GitHub."
"It's a bit expensive, but it works well. You get what you pay for."
"I compared the solution to a couple of other solutions, and I think it is very competitively priced."
"We have seen a return on investment. The amount of time that we would have spent manually doing this definitely outpaces the cost of GitGuardian. It is saving us about $35,000 a year, so I would say the ROI is about $20,000 a year."
"We don't have a huge number of users, but its yearly rate was quite reasonable when compared to other per-seat solutions that we looked at... Having a free plan for a small number of users was really great. If you're a small team, I don't see why you wouldn't want to get started with it."
"It's a little bit expensive."
"With GitGuardian, we didn't need any middlemen."
"It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are very happy with the value we get."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
16%
Hospitality Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Wholesaler/Distributor
11%
Government
18%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Entro Security?
Entro Security is not the cheapest solution. However, I am willing to pay for quality cybersecurity products. We received a good discount this year, which significantly reduced the price. Next year...
What needs improvement with Entro Security?
Entro Security could benefit from improvements in IAM control to allow segregation of duties among developers. Providing a more modular alerting system to have proactive measures without extensive ...
What is your primary use case for Entro Security?
I am a Security Engineer at a company called Regatta. We started using Entro Security to address a request from one of the head developers to gain control over secrets and identities. We initially ...
What do you like most about GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
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 smal...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.
What needs improvement with GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives. We utilize the automated playbooks from GitGuardian Platform, and we are enhancing them. We will pr...
 

Also Known As

No data available
GitGuardian Internal Monitoring, GitGuardian Public Monitoring
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Paramount, Agoda, Dropbox, Kayak, Elastic, Fubo, SafeBreach, Sprinklr, Aqua, Mastech Digital, Solarwinds, Crum&Forster, Regatta Group, ISO New England, Nasuni, Maccabi Healthcare Services
Widely adopted by developer communities, GitGuardian is used by over 600 thousand developers and leading companies, including Snowflake, Orange, Iress, Mirantis, Maven Wave, ING, BASF, and Bouygues Telecom.
Find out what your peers are saying about Entro Security vs. GitGuardian Platform and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.