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

GitHub Advanced Security 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

GitHub Advanced Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
11th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitHub Advanced Security is 8.8%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.1%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Sabna Sainudeen - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamlessly integrates into developer environment for streamlined code scanning
GitHub Advanced Security should look into API security issues, which they currently do not. Additionally, open-source security vulnerabilities are not getting updated in a timely manner. There are features in GitHub Advanced Security that cannot be used within Microsoft, which is strange since they are the same company. It should also focus on developing a software bill of materials (SBOM) to see all open software used in one place.
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

"GitHub Advanced Security uses artificial intelligence in the backend, specifically CodeQL, to analyze code and provide fewer but more reliable findings, so there are less false positives."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"GitHub Advanced Security is a very developer-friendly solution that is integrated within my development environment."
"The initial setup was straightforward and completed in a matter of minutes."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"I have not experienced any performance or stability issues with GitHub Advanced Security."
"GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need."
"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"The Repeater and the BApp extensions are particularly useful. Certain extensions, such as the Active Scan extensions and the Autoracer extension, are very good."
"In my area of expertise, I feel like it has almost everything I could possibly require at this moment."
"It's good testing software."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"The solution is stable."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
"The automated scan is what I find most useful because a lot of customers will need it. Not every domain will be looking for complete security, they just need a stamp on the security key. For these kinds of customers, the scan works really well."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the advanced features, user-friendly interface, and integration with other tools."
 

Cons

"GitHub Advanced Security should look into API security issues, which they currently do not. Additionally, open-source security vulnerabilities are not getting updated in a timely manner."
"The reporting feature might need improvement. While it integrates seamlessly with my workflow, it doesn't provide management with oversight, such as statistics and the number of vulnerabilities."
"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
"For GitHub Advanced Security, I would like to see more support for various programming languages."
"Maybe make it compatible with more programming languages. Have a customized ruleset where the end-user can create their own rules for scanning."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."
"There could be DST features included in the product."
"The tool is very expensive."
"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."
"Scanning APIs using PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional takes a lot of time."
"The price could be better. The rest is fine."
"The Iran market does not have after-sales support. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional needs to provide after-sales support."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"As with most automated security tools, too many false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The current licensing model, which relies on active commitments, poses challenges, particularly in predicting and managing growth."
"The solution is expensive."
"The platform's pricing is reasonable."
"This solution requires a license. It is expensive but you receive a lot of functionality for the price."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is an expensive solution."
"It is expensive for us in Brazil because the currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep."
"The price for the solution is expensive and could be cheaper. We pay an annual license and our team has several of them."
"PortSwigger is reasonably-priced. It's fair."
"Licensing costs are about $450/year for one use. For larger organizations, they're able to test against multiple applications while simultaneously others might have multiple versions of applications which needs to be tested which is why we have the enterprise edition."
"At $400 or $500 per license paid annually, it is a very cheap tool."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitHub Advanced Security?
It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part.
What needs improvement with GitHub Advanced Security?
For GitHub Advanced Security, I would like to see more support for various programming languages. Additionally, it would be beneficial to have more control at an organizational level rather than ha...
What is your primary use case for GitHub Advanced Security?
I use GitHub Advanced Security ( /products/github-advanced-security-reviews ) at my workplace to scan for code vulnerabilities and secrets in our software development workflow. It is used across mu...
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

Information Not Available
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Advanced Security vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.