Bright Security
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Bright Security's? The following comparison table enables you to
discern the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company’s
cybersecurity needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the
dedicated page.
Organization
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Bright
|
|
Focus
|
|||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Headcount
|
116 | ||
|
Headcount distribution
|
|||
|
Headcount growth
|
+5%, +3%, +5% | ||
|
Headquarters
|
IL and US | ||
|
Countries
|
IL and US | ||
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
||
|
Followers
|
Same
|
||
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Founded
|
2001 | ||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$30.3M
USD
in 4 rounds from 7 investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Revenue
|
|||
|
CVEs as CNA Researcher
|
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC
2 Type II and SOC
3
|
||
|
Bug bounty
|
|||
|
Visits
|
|||
|
Authority
|
|||
|
Public vulnerability DB
|
None
|
||
|
Content
|
Same
|
||
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation
sections, 6 in common
and 7 additional
|
7 KB
sections, 6 in common and 1
additional
|
|
|
Community
|
No
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use
courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
||
| Marketplaces | AWS, Azure and GitHub | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
|||
|
Demo
|
|||
|
Open Demo
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
|||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
|
Minimum term
|
|||
|
Minimum payment period
|
|||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
Same plus: API security testing, PTaaS,
RE and SCR
|
||
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
1 scan
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
|||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
|||
|
Free implementation
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free support
|
No information available
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Bright
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
No | |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research
|
None
|
|
SLA
|
No | ||
|
Min availability
|
>=99.95%
per minute LTM
|
None
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards,
11 in common and 56
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
13 standards, 11
in common and 2
additional
|
|
Detection method
|
|||
|
Remediation
|
5,
4 in common and 1 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
4, all in
common
|
|
Outputs
|
5,
1 in common and 4
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
4, 1
in common and 3 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Bright
|
|
ASPM
|
No
|
||
|
API
|
|||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities,
1 in common and 4
additional
|
1 functionality
in common
|
|
|
CLI
|
|||
|
CI/CD
|
|||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
No information available
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
|||
|
SCA
|
No
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
SBOM
|
No
|
||
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Containers
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
No
|
||
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
IaC
|
No
|
||
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary
|
No
|
|
|
DAST
|
7 attack
surface types, 5 in common and
2 additional
|
6 attacks surface types, 5
in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
API security testing
|
No
|
4 types
of APIs, 3 in common and 1
additional
|
6 types
of APIs, 3 in common and 3
additional
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
Same,
plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
No
|
|
|
AI
|
3 functions,
1 in common and 2
additional
|
1 function in
common
|
|
|
MCP
|
No
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
|
Provisioning as Code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
|||
| Regions | |||
|
Status
|
|||
|
Incidents
|
No information available
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Bright
|
|
SCM
|
None
|
||
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3,
all in common
|
4, 3 in
common and 1 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
1 |
|
IDE
|
3,
1 in common and 2 additional
|
1
in common
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 7
in common and 14 additional
|
8, 7 in common and 1
additional
|
|
|
SCA
|
None
|
||
|
Container
|
None |
||
|
SAST
|
|||
|
DAST
|
|||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
None
|
||
|
CSPM
|
None | ||
|
Secrets
|
None
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
References were last checked on Dec 03, 2025.
More like Bright Security
Free trial
Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start
your 21-day free trial and discover the
benefits of the Continuous
Hacking Essential plan. If you prefer the
Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' hacking team, fill out this contact form.