We performed a comparison between GitGuardian Public Monitoring and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Testing (AST)."One thing I really like about it is the fact that we can add search words or specific payloads inside the tool, and GitGuardian will look into GitHub and alert us if any of these words is found in a repository... With this capability in the tool, we have good surveillance over our potential blind spots."
"The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for."
"If you want something that’s not provided out of the box, then you can write it yourself and integrate it with SOAtest."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Technical support is helpful."
"I'm excited about the possibility of Public Postman scanning being integrated with GitGuardian in the future. Additionally, I'm interested in exploring the potential use of honeytokens, which seems like a compelling approach to lure and identify attackers."
"I would like to see improvement in some of the user interface features... When one secret is leaked in multiple files or multiple repositories, it will appear on the dashboard. But when you click on that secret, all the occurrences will appear on the page. It would be better to have one secret per occurrence, directly, so that we don't have to click to get to the list of all the occurrences."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."
"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."
More GitGuardian Public Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
GitGuardian Public Monitoring is ranked 19th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 2 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 28th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 30 reviews. GitGuardian Public Monitoring is rated 9.0, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GitGuardian Public Monitoring writes "Helps us prioritize remediation tasks efficiently, improves our overall security visibility, and is effective in detecting and alerting us to security leaks quickly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". GitGuardian Public Monitoring is most compared with Snyk, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.