No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Entro Security vs GitGuardian Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

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

Entro Security
Ranking in Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM)
4th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.4
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
GitGuardian Platform
Ranking in Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM)
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
34
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) category, the mindshare of Entro Security is 8.3%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 3.4%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Entro Security8.3%
GitGuardian Platform3.4%
Other88.3%
Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM)
 

Featured Reviews

YL
Cybersecurity Analyst at a hospitality company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We get improved visibility and excellent support but require better detection of custom data
Reduction in the attack surface is the main benefit. We have not worked with it much yet, but so far, it has been good. It can be improved a bit more in the future, but so far, we have just scratched the surface with Entro Security. Entro Security has helped develop a better culture among developers. They are willing and starting to use something called Vault to store credentials, and they even do it without us telling them. In the past, they used to post everything like in ClearText, whereas now, they are voluntarily migrating the information to Vault. I am pretty sure it is because Entro Security is also annoying them. Every time there is a finding, we ping them via Slack. The ping comes from Entro itself. They do not want to be bothered by messages. They do not want to be seen as a bad employee, so they are using it on their own. It is not hard for us to establish behavioral baselines for non-human identities (NHI) in Entro Security. It is important that Entro Security’s detection and mitigation of NHI threats is done in real-time. It is becoming a worldwide issue, not only in our company. So many companies are trying to solve this issue where developers are posting credentials in plain text. It is of very high priority. It is not critical, but it is highly important. Entro Security has improved visibility, revealing the extent of our credential issues, where strong credentials like admin accounts were found in plaintext in numerous projects. We have more visibility and control. We got to know that the issue was much bigger than we thought. We thought that only one out of ten projects would have some kind of password, but we found more than five to seven projects having plain text credentials. The credentials stored were of strong accounts. They had put admin account information in plain text. We did not think it would be this severe. We thought that, at worst, they would be some maintainer credentials, but they were using full admin credentials in their code and had put them just in plain text. Entro Security has helped improve our organization’s security posture. Entro Security has decreased our exposure to risk. It reduces exposure from the inside, not from the outside.
Ney Roman - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at Deuna
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The top features of Entro Security that stand out are its ease of onboarding and discovery."
"Entro Security's free evaluation managed to find thousands of secrets, which was a game-changer for us."
"They are very helpful and responsive. They acknowledge issues, take feedback seriously, and implement features based on user requests."
"Entro Security has helped develop a better culture among developers."
"The most valuable feature is the alerts when secrets are leaked and we can look at particular repositories to see if there are any outstanding problems. In addition, the solution's detection capabilities seem very broad. We have no concerns there."
"GitGuardian Platform has helped save significant time for the security team by eliminating the need to seek out development teams and work with them on exposed secrets, as much of this is now handled proactively."
"It's fantastic. We have checked a couple of other vendors and seen their results, which are quite inferior to the amount of detail that the GitGuardian Platform provides. With instantaneous notifications connected to our Slack platform, it allows us to deal quickly with incidents."
"Time to remediation is now in minutes or hours, whereas it used to take days or weeks previously."
"You can also assign tasks to specific teams or people to complete, such as assigning something to the "blue team" or saying that this person needs to do this, and that person needs to do that. That is a great feature because you can actually manage your team internally in GitGuardian."
"We have definitely seen a return on investment when it finds things that are real. We have caught a couple things before they made it to production, and had they made it to production, that would have been dangerous."
"The entire GitGuardian solution is valuable. The product is doing its job and showing us many things. We get many false positives, but the ability to automatically display potential leaks when developers commit is valuable. The dashboards show you recent and historical commits, and we have a full scan that shows historical leaked secrets."
"Transferring code from another platform to GitGuardian enabled us to see open passwords in old repositories and enabled us to clean them well and create a barrier against security leaks."
 

Cons

"The detection of generic content or custom data specific to our company needs improvement. It has trouble detecting unique patterns of secrets."
"Entro Security could benefit from improvements in IAM control to allow segregation of duties among developers."
"GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives."
"It took us a while to get new patterns introduced into the pattern reporting process."
"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."
"There are some features that are lacking in GitGuardian. The more we grow and the more engineers we have, the more it will become difficult to assign an incident because the assignment is not automatic. I know they are working on that and we are waiting for it."
"They could give a developer access to a dashboard for their team's repositories that just shows their repository secrets. I think more could be exposed to developers."
"One improvement that I'd like to see is a cleaner for Splunk logs. It would be nice to have a middle man for anything we send or receive from Splunk forwarders. I'd love to see it get cleaned by GitGuardian or caught to make sure we don't have any secrets getting committed to Splunk logs."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in GitGuardian on Azure DevOps. The implementation is a bit hard there. This is one of the things we requested help with. I would not say their support is not good, but they need them to improve in helping customers on that side."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I am only aware of the base price. I do not know what happened with our purchasing team in discussions with GitGuardian. I was not privy to the overall contract, but in terms of the base MSRP price, I found it reasonable."
"It's fairly priced, as it performs a lot of analysis and is a valuable tool."
"It could be cheaper. When GitHub secrets monitoring solution goes to general access and general availability, GitGuardian might be in a little bit of trouble from the competition, and maybe then they might lower their prices. The GitGuardian solution is great. I'm just concerned that they're not GitHub."
"With GitGuardian, we didn't need any middlemen."
"It's not cheap, but it's not crazy expensive either."
"The pricing for GitGuardian is fair."
"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."
"GitGuardian is on the pricier side."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Wholesaler/Distributor
17%
Computer Software Company
12%
Hospitality Company
10%
Healthcare Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Entro Security?
Entro Security is not the cheapest solution. However, I am willing to pay for quality cybersecurity products. We received a good discount this year, which significantly reduced the price. Next year...
What needs improvement with Entro Security?
Entro Security could benefit from improvements in IAM control to allow segregation of duties among developers. Providing a more modular alerting system to have proactive measures without extensive ...
What is your primary use case for Entro Security?
I am a Security Engineer at a company called Regatta. We started using Entro Security to address a request from one of the head developers to gain control over secrets and identities. We initially ...
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 is your primary use case for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?
Our current use cases for GitGuardian Platform involve monitoring external and internal GitHub and GitLab, Bitbucket, and other code repositories that it supports for secrets.
 

Also Known As

No data available
GitGuardian Internal Monitoring, GitGuardian Public Monitoring
 

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Paramount, Agoda, Dropbox, Kayak, Elastic, Fubo, SafeBreach, Sprinklr, Aqua, Mastech Digital, Solarwinds, Crum&Forster, Regatta Group, ISO New England, Nasuni, Maccabi Healthcare Services
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.
Find out what your peers are saying about Entro Security vs. GitGuardian Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.