GitGuardian Platform vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

GitGuardian Platform vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Download the complete report

Helped 868,706 peers since 2012

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

GitGuardian Platform

Ranking in Application Security Tools

9th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (5th), Software Supply Chain Security (6th), DevSecOps (3rd), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (3rd)

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

14th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

13th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 0.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
GitGuardian Platform	0.9%
OpenText Core Application Security	3.9%
Other	95.2%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Ney Roman

DevOps Engineer at Deuna App

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.

Read full review

Jonathan Steyn

Principal Technical Consultant at EOH

Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis

Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."

"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."

"Some of our teams have hundreds of repositories, so filtering by team saves a lot of time and effort."

"The most valuable feature is its ability to automate both downloading the repository and generating a Software Bill of Materials directly from it."

"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."

"It enables us to identify leaks that happened in the past and remediate current leaks as they happen in near real-time. When I say "near real-time," I mean within minutes. These are industry-leading remediation timelines for credential leaks. Previously, it might have taken companies years to get credentials detected or remediated. We can do it in minutes."

"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."

"I like that GitGuardian automatically notifies the developer who committed the change. The security team doesn't need to act as the intermediary and tell the developer there is an alert. The alert goes directly to the developer."

More GitGuardian Platform pros

"The solution is user-friendly. One feature I find very effective is the tool's automatic scanning capability. It scans replicas of the code developers write and automatically detects any vulnerabilities. The integration with CI/CD tools is also useful for plugins."

"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."

"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."

"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."

"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."

"The scanning capabilities, particularly for our repositories, have been invaluable."

"I use the solution in my company for security code scans."

"Once we have our project created with our application pipeline connected to the test scanning, it only takes two minutes. The report explaining what needs to be modified related to security and vulnerabilities in our code is very helpful. We are able to do static and dynamic code scanning."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives."

"We have encountered occasional difficulties with the Single Sign-On process."

"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."

"Other solutions have a live chat feature that provides instant results. Waiting for an agent to reply to an email is less ideal than an instant conversation with a support employee. That's a complaint so minor I almost hesitate to mention it."

"GitGuardian could have more detailed information on what software engineers can do. It only provides some highly generic feedback when a secret is detected. They should have outside documentation. We send this to our software engineers, who are still doing the commits. It's the wrong way to work, but they are accustomed to doing it this way. When they go into that ticket, they see a few instructions that might be confusing. If I see a leaked secret committed two years ago, it's not enough to undo that commit. I need to go in there, change all my code to utilize GitHub secrets, and go on AWS to validate my key."

"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."

"An area for improvement is the front end for incidents. The user experience in this area could be much better."

"It would be nice if they supported detecting PII or had some kind of data loss prevention feature."

More GitGuardian Platform cons

"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."

"In terms of what could be improved, we need more strategic analysis reports, not just for one specific application, but for the whole enterprise. In the next release, we need more reports and more analytic views for all the applications. There is no enterprise view in Fortify. I would like enterprise views and reports."

"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."

"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."

"It would be highly beneficial if Fortify on Demand incorporated runtime analysis, similar to how Contrast Security utilizes agents for proactive application security."

"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."

"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."

".NET code scanning is still dependent on building the code base before running any scan. Also, it's dependent on an IDE such as Visual Studio."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is reasonable. GitGuardian is one of the most recent security tools we've adopted. When it came time to renew it, there was no doubt about it. It is licensed per developer, so it scales nicely with the number of repos that we have. We can create new repositories and break up work. It isn't scaling based on the amount of data it's consuming."

"It's a little bit expensive."

"With GitGuardian, we didn't need any middlemen."

"I compared the solution to a couple of other solutions, and I think it is very competitively priced."

"The pricing and licensing are fair. It isn't very expensive and it's good value."

"You get what you pay for. It's one of the more expensive solutions, but it is very good, and the low false positive rate is a really appealing factor."

"It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are very happy with the value we get."

"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."

More GitGuardian Platform pricing and cost advice

"We are still using the trial version at this point but I can already see from the trial version alone that it is a good product. For others, I would say that Fortify on Demand might look expensive at the beginning, but it is very powerful and so you shouldn't be put off by the price."

"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."

"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."

"The product's cost depends on the type of license."

"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."

"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."

"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."

"The solution is a little expensive."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

868,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

19%

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	43

Questions from the Community

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...

What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...

Snyk vs GitGuardian Platform

Comparisons

Compared 17% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 16% of the time

SafeGuard Cyber Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 16% of the time

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 13% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 13% of the time

More GitGuardian Platform Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 16% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 13% of the time

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 9% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 7% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

GitGuardian Platform

Download GitGuardian Platform product report

OpenText Core Application Security

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

OpenText Core Application Security report

Also Known As

GitGuardian Internal Monitoring, GitGuardian Public Monitoring

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

GitGuardian is an advanced secrets security platform that strengthens Non-Human Identity security and ensures compliance with industry standards by detecting and managing secrets in development environments.

GitGuardian integrates Secrets Security and Secrets Observability, facilitating the detection of compromised secrets and managing legitimate secrets' lifecycle. Supporting over 450 types of secrets, the platform offers public monitoring for leaked data and employs honeytokens as an added defense. Trusted by over 600,000 developers, organizations such as Snowflake and ING rely on GitGuardian for robust secrets protection.

What features define GitGuardian?

Internal Monitoring: Tracks confidential data like IDs and tokens.
Dev in the Loop: Rapid alerts for leaks.
Detection Capabilities: High accuracy with a low false-positive rate.
Integrations: Supports seamless integration with multiple platforms.
Customized Detectors: Offers tailored security solutions.
Multi-Vault Support: Facilitates efficient issue management.

What are the key benefits when evaluating GitGuardian?

Comprehensive Detection: Identifies AWS keys and other hardcoded secrets.
Efficient Remediation: Swiftly resolves issues.
Improved Security: Prevents accidental leaks of sensitive data.
Seamless Integration: Compatible with platforms like GitHub and Azure DevOps.

In sectors like healthcare and telecommunications, GitGuardian is implemented for detecting and managing the exposure of sensitive information in code repositories. Teams benefit from its ability to integrate with platforms such as GitHub, allowing for immediate alerts and efficient remediation of security risks, enhancing application security by safeguarding operational environments.

GitGuardian

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

Sample Customers

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.

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

GitGuardian Platform vs. OpenText Core Application Security