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

GitGuardian Public Monitoring vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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 Public Monitoring
Ranking in Application Security Tools
22nd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
19th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (23rd), Threat Intelligence Platforms (18th)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitGuardian Public Monitoring is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.2%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Theo Cusnir - PeerSpot reviewer
Detects and alerts us about leaks quickly, and enables us to filter and prioritize occurrences
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. For example, if I put "Payfit" in the tool, I will be alerted every time someone is committing with that word in the code. It's really useful for internal domain names, to detect if someone is leaking internal code. With this capability in the tool, we have good surveillance over our potential blind spots. It can detect a leak in 10 minutes. We had an experience with one of our engineers who had leaked a secret, and 10 minutes afterward we had a warning from GitGuardian about the leak. It's very effective. We looked at the commit date and the current date with hours and minutes and we could see that the commit had been made 10 minutes ago. As a result, we are sure it is pretty fast. Another feature, one that helps prioritize remediation, is that you can filter the findings by criticality. That definitely helps us to prioritize which secrets we should rotate and delete.
Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for."
"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."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has an intercept tab that helps us to scan our APIs, set the response, and request errors."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is one of the best user-friendly solutions for getting the proxy set up."
"For pentesting scenarios, this is the number one tool. It can capture the request, and there are so many functions that are very good for that. For example, a black box satellite host."
"The Spider is the most useful feature. It helps to analyze the entire web application, and it finds all the passes and offers an automated identification of security issues."
"The suite testing models are very good. It's very secure."
"The most valuable feature is Burp Collaborator."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
 

Cons

"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."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
"The solution doesn't offer very good scalability."
"The solution is not easy to set it up. You need a lot of knowledge."
"The Burp Collaborator needs improvement. There also needs to be improved integration."
"I would like to see the return of the spider mechanism instead of the crawling feature. Burp Suite's earlier version 1.7 had an excellent spider option, and it would be beneficial if Burp incorporated those features into the current version. The crawling techniques used in the current version are not as efficient as those used in earlier versions."
"We'd like to have more integration potential across all versions of the product."
"Scanning APIs using PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional takes a lot of time."
"The number of false positives need to be reduced on the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a bit expensive, but it works well. You get what you pay for."
"Burp Suite is affordable."
"It is expensive for us in Brazil because the currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep."
"There are different licenses available that include a free version."
"The pricing of the solution is cost-effective and is best suited for small and medium-sized businesses."
"It's a lower priced tool that we can rely on with good standard mechanisms."
"I rate the pricing a four out of ten."
"The yearly cost is about $300."
"This is a value for money product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitGuardian Public Monitoring?
The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for.
What needs improvement with GitGuardian Public Monitoring?
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...
What is your primary use case for GitGuardian Public Monitoring?
We use GitGuardian Public Monitoring for code that is exposed in public.
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Burp
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Align Technology, Automox, Fred Hutch, Instacart, Maven Wave, Mirantis, SafetyCulture, Snowflake, Talend
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about GitGuardian Public Monitoring vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.