We performed a comparison between GitLab and Ixia BreakingPoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of GitLab is its security."
"The most important features of GitLab for us are issue management and all the CI/CD tools. Another aspect that I love about GitLab is the UI."
"Git hosting has an integration with ACD which is why we liked this solution in the first place."
"The important feature is the entire process of versioning source code maintenance and easy deployment. It is a necessity for the CI/CD pipeline."
"It is scalable."
"I like that you can use GitLab as a double-sided solution for both DevOps and version management. It's a good product for working in these two areas, and the user interface makes it easy to understand."
"As a developer, this solution is useful as a repository holder because most of the POC projects that we have are on GitLab."
"It's a great toolbox where the CI/CD pipeline is the fundamental component, but there are so many other features that you can pull from, which makes it a very powerful tool. My current client is using AWS, and they can, of course, use AWS CodePipeline, but GitLab is much more mature than that, and it also gives you the freedom to decide to go to another platform or have a multi-cloud strategy and things like that. That freedom for me is also very valuable."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"I would like to see static analysis also embedded in GitLab. That would also help us. If there's something that it does internally by GitLab and then that is already tied up with your pipeline and then it can tell you that you're coding is good or your code is not great. Based on that, it would pass or fail. That should be streamlined. I would think that would help to a greater extent, in terms of having one solution rather than depending on multiple vendors."
"The solution should be more cloud-native and have more cloud-native capabilities and features."
"We have only seen a couple of issues on Gitlab, which we use for building some of the applications."
"GitLab doesn't have AWS integration. It would be better to have integration with other container management environments beyond Kubernetes. It has very good integration with Kubernetes, but it doesn't have good integration with, for example, AWS, ETS, etc."
"I would like more Agile features in the Premium version. The Premium version should have all Agile features that exist in the Ultimate version. IBM AOM has a complete Agile implementation, but in GitLab, you only have these features if you buy the Ultimate version. It would be good if we can use these in the Premium version."
"GitLab could add a plugin to integrate with Kubernetes stuff."
"There was a problem with the build environment when we were looking at developing iOS applications. iOS build require Mac machines and there are no Mac machines provided by GitLab in their cloud. So to build for mobile iOS application, we needed to use our own Mac machine within our own infrastructure. If GitLab were to provide a feature such that an iOS application could also be built through GitLab directly, that would be great."
"Perhaps the integration could be better."
"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"The price could be better."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
GitLab is ranked 7th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 70 reviews while Ixia BreakingPoint is ranked 23rd in Application Security Testing (AST) with 8 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Ixia BreakingPoint is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ixia BreakingPoint writes "Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube and Tekton, whereas Ixia BreakingPoint is most compared with Spirent CyberFlood and Synopsys Defensics. See our GitLab vs. Ixia BreakingPoint report.
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.