We performed a comparison between GitLab and Mend.io based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We like that we can create branches and then the branches can be reviewed and you can mesh those branches back. You can independently work with your own branch, you don't need to really control the core of other people."
"It scales well."
"The stability is good."
"The solution has an established roadmap that lays out its plans for upgrades over the next two to three years."
"The solution is stable."
"This is a scalable solution. We had around 200 users working with it."
"The dashboard and interface make it easy to use."
"Key features allow creation of well-presented Wiki that includes ideas, development, and domains."
"Attribution and license due diligence reports help us with aggregating the necessary data that we, in turn, have to provide to satisfy the various licenses copyright and component usage disclosures in our software."
"It gives us full visibility into what we're using, what needs to be updated, and what's vulnerable, which helps us make better decisions."
"Our dev team uses the fix suggestions feature to quickly find the best path for remediation."
"Its ease of use and good results are the most valuable."
"The solution is scalable."
"WhiteSource helped reduce our mean time to resolution since the adoption of the product."
"WhiteSource is unique in the scanning of open-source licenses. Additionally, the vulnerabilities aspect of the solution is a benefit. We don't use WhiteSource in the whole organization, but we use it for some projects. There we receive a sense of the vulnerabilities of the open-source components, which improves our security work. The reports are automated which is useful."
"The solution boasts a broad range of features and covers much of what an ideal SCA tool should."
"As GitLab is not perfect, what needs improvement in the solution is the Wiki feature of the groups or the repertories because currently, it's not searchable by default. You'll need an indexing service such as Elasticsearch to make it searchable, and that requires too much work, so for me, it's the main feature that should be improved in GitLab. In the next version of the solution, from the top of my head, the documentation could be improved. Besides the Wiki, it would be good if there's documentation that would be automatically generated based on the code repository. In other words, there should be some tutorials from GitLab for developers in the next release."
"The only thing our company is really waiting on in terms of features is the development of metrics."
"It should be used by a larger number of people. They should raise awareness."
"GitLab's UI could be improved."
"It could have more security integrations and the ability to check the vulnerability of the code. I don't think it is a responsibility of Gitlab, but it would be nice to have more options to integrate with."
"I would like configuration of a YML file to be done via UI rather than a code file."
"The solution should be more cloud-native and have more cloud-native capabilities and features."
"Some of the scripts that we encountered in GitLab were not fully functional and threw up errors."
"On the reporting side, they could make some improvements. They are making the reports better and better, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to generate a report for our entire organization."
"WhiteSource only produces a report, which is nice to look at. However, you have to check that report every week, to see if something was found that you don't want. It would be great if the build that's generating a report would fail if it finds a very important vulnerability, for instance."
"The only thing that I don't find support for on Mend Prioritize is C++."
"It should support multiple SBOM formats to be able to integrate with old industry standards."
"We specifically use this solution within our CICD pipelines in Azure DevOps, and we would like to have a gate so that if the score falls below a certain value then we can block the pipeline from running."
"The turnaround time for upgrading databases for this tool as well as the accuracy could be improved."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"They're working on a UI refresh. That's probably been one of the pain points for us as it feels like a really old application."
GitLab is ranked 7th in Application Security Tools with 68 reviews while Mend.io is ranked 6th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Mend.io 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 Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube and Tekton, whereas Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Snyk and Checkmarx. See our GitLab vs. Mend.io report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.