Legit Security
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Legit 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
|
Legit Security
|
|
Focus
|
|||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Headcount
|
|||
|
Headcount
Distribution
|
|||
|
Headcount
Growth
|
|||
|
Headquarters
|
|||
|
Countries
|
Same
|
||
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
||
|
Followers
|
Same
|
||
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
Frost
& Sullivan and IDC
|
|
Founded
|
2001 | ||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$73.5M
USD in 3 rounds
from 7 investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Revenue
|
|||
|
CVE
|
257 CVEs
reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10
CVE labs
worldwide
|
0 CVEs reported to MITRE
|
|
|
Compliance
|
ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 | ||
|
Bug Bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
|||
|
Authority
|
|||
|
Vulnerability
database
|
|||
|
Content
|
Same
|
||
|
Knowledge
base
|
13 KB sections, 2
in common and 11 additional
|
5 KB
sections, 2 in common and 3 additional
|
|
|
Community
|
No
|
||
|
Sync
training
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Async
training
|
3 product
use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
||
| Marketplaces | AWS and Azure | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
|||
|
Demo
|
|||
|
Pricing
|
|||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
|
Minimum
commit
|
|||
|
Minimum payment
period
|
Annually | ||
|
Minimum
capabilities
|
No information available
|
||
|
Minimum
scope
|
1 group
|
1 author
|
100 users
|
|
Pricing
drivers
|
|||
|
Minimum monthly
payment
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Legit Security
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
Yes | No |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Manual
reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
SLA
|
Availability | ||
|
Min
availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>=99.5% unknown per
year
|
|
|
After-sale
guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
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 65 standards, 13 in
common and 52 additional
|
All requirements from
the same standards
|
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated
tools and AI
|
||
|
Remediation
|
5, 2 in
common and 3 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
2,
all in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5,
2 in common and 3 additional
|
Same,
plus 2
|
2, all in common
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Legit Security
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes | ||
|
API
|
No
|
||
|
IDE
|
Same, plus 1
functionality
|
No
|
|
|
CLI
|
|||
|
CI/CD
|
|||
|
Vulnerability
sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Priority
criteria
|
Same
|
||
|
Custom
prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner
origin
|
|||
|
SCA
|
Yes.
No information available
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
||
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
type
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
SBOM
|
Yes. No
information available
|
||
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Containers
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST (languages)
|
12, 2 in common and 10 additional
|
3,
2 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST (frameworks)
|
No information available |
||
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
IaC
|
6,
2 in common and 4 additional
|
3,
2 in
common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type
of binary
|
Same, plus 2 types of
binaries
|
No
|
|
DAST
|
No |
||
|
API security
testing
|
No
|
Yes. No information
available
|
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes | ||
|
Environments
|
Left & Right
(included)
|
Same
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
15 secrets
types, 3 in common and 12 additional
|
Same, plus verify other attack
vectors and secrets
exploitability
|
3 secret types,
all in common
|
|
AI
|
3 functions,
none in common
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
Provisioning as Code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
|||
| Regions |
No information available
|
||
|
Status
|
|||
|
Incidents
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Legit Security
|
|
SCM
|
4, all in common
|
8, 4 in
common and 4 additional
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, all in common
|
5, 3 in common and 2 additional |
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
|
|
IDE
|
None |
||
|
CI/CD
|
20, 7 in common and 13
additional
|
9, 7 in common and 2
additional
|
|
|
SCA
|
|||
|
Container
|
|||
|
SAST
|
|||
|
DAST
|
|||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
|||
|
CSPM
|
6 | ||
|
Secrets
|
|||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
References were last checked on Aug 28, 2025.
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.