Socket
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Socket 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
|
Socket
|
|
Focus
|
Software supply chain security
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
Container scanning, SAST and secret scanning powered by OSS tools
|
|
Headcount
|
79 | ||
| Headcount distribution |
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 24%, IT 9%, sales 20% and others 47%
|
|
| Headcount growth |
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
+30%, +93%, +259%
|
|
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
US
|
|
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
9.6 from 8 reviews over 2 years on G2
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
11K based on the following: LinkedIn,
X and YouTube
|
|
| Research firms |
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2020
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$64.6M USD in 3 rounds from 36
investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
Acquired 0 times and made 1 acquisition
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
1M to 10M
|
|
| CVEs as CNA Researcher |
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
SOC 2 Type I and SOC 2 Type II | |
| Bug bounty |
Yes
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K
per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
132K per month. Top 3: 16% JP, 12% US,
9% TR. Others 63%
|
|
|
Authority
|
40 out of 100
|
||
| Public vulnerability DB |
Discovered and third-party
|
None
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, documentation, glossary and news
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 6 in common
and 7 additional
|
6 documentation section, all in common
|
|
|
Community
|
Chat (discord)
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct
|
|
| Marketplaces | GCP and GitHub | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Free trial
|
PoV
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
| Open demo |
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales and public web
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
2 plans (team, enterprise + business).
First two transparent
|
|
Minimum term
|
Monthly
|
||
|
Minimum payment period
|
Monthly
|
||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and
secrets
|
Same plus: API
security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR
|
SCA |
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
1 developer
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
Developers
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free support
|
No
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Socket
|
|
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
|
Support | ||
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
None
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
No information available
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools and AI
|
|
|
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
|
3, 1 in common and 2 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Socket
|
|
ASPM
|
No
|
||
|
API
|
REST with JSON
|
||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 1 in common and 4
additional
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
2 functionalities, 1 in common and 1
additional
|
|
CLI
|
Yes
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Breaks the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources, 1 in common and 3 additional
|
2 sources, 1 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house and External (Opengrep/Semgrep
for SAST, TruffleHog for secrets and Trivy for containers)
|
||
|
SCA
|
23 package managers, 12 in common and 11
additional
|
13 package managers, 12 in common and 1
additional
|
|
|
AI security
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages, 9 in common and 3
additional
|
11 languages, 9 in common and 2 additional
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Deterministic
|
||
|
SBOM
|
22 package managers, 2 in common and 20
additional
|
6 package managers, 2 in common and 4
additional
|
|
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Containers
|
4 distributions, all in common
|
13, all in common and 9 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12, all in common
|
18, 12 in common and 6 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
22, 6 in common and 16 additional
|
7, 6 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
No |
|
IaC
|
No
|
||
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary
|
Same, plus 2 types of binaries
|
No
|
|
DAST
|
No
|
||
|
API security testing
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, none in common
|
2 functions, none in common
|
|
|
MCP
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
| Provisioning as code |
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS + on-premises (no tenancy
information)
|
||
| Regions |
No information available
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
2 per year
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Socket
|
|
SCM
|
6, 3 in common and 3 additional
|
4, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
4, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
2 |
|
IDE
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
7, 2 in common and 5 additional
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 4 in common and 17 additional
|
5, 4 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
SCA
|
Native
|
||
|
Container
|
Native powered by Trivy | ||
|
SAST
|
Native powered by Sempgrep/Opengrep
|
||
|
DAST
|
None
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
None
|
||
|
CSPM
|
None | ||
|
Secrets
|
Native powered by TruffleHog
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
| Bug bounty |
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
2
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 15, 2025. The primary sources of information
were socket.dev and docs.socket.dev, which were supplemented by specialized
information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Socket 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.