# Chainguard AI visibility in DevSecOps & Application Security

Canonical: https://devtune.ai/verticals/devsecops-application-security/chainguard

[Website](https://chainguard.dev/)

Updated: 2026-10-16T02:51:45.583033+00:00
Prompts: 25
Runs: 6


## Platforms

- google-ai-mode
- perplexity
- chatgpt-search
- google-ai
- bing-copilot-search
- xai-search

Rank: 12
Total brands: 12
Measured responses: 150
Presence percent: 0
Share of voice percent: 0
Average position: Not available
Docs presence percent: 0
Blog presence percent: 0
Brand mention percent: 2


## Profile

Overview: Chainguard, founded in October 2021 and headquartered in Kirkland, Washington, is a software supply chain security company that provides hardened, secure-by-default open source software artifacts. Its product suite includes 2,000+ minimal zero-CVE container images, malware-resistant language libraries (Python, Java, JavaScript), and secure virtual machine images—all built daily from source inside a SLSA L3-compliant Chainguard Factory. Rather than detecting vulnerabilities post-build, Chainguard eliminates them proactively using cryptographic attestations, signed SBOMs, and Sigstore-based provenance. It targets enterprises seeking to reduce CVE backlogs, satisfy compliance mandates (FedRAMP, PCI DSS, HIPAA, CMMC), and accelerate developer velocity. Led by Google open source veterans, Chainguard has raised $892 million in total funding at a $3.5 billion valuation and serves 150+ customers including Snowflake, Snap, OpenAI, Canva, and Anduril.
Product summary: Chainguard is a software supply chain security platform that acts as a trusted source for open source software. Its core offering is a continuously rebuilt catalog of hardened, minimal artifacts—container images, language libraries, and VM images—produced in a SLSA L3-compliant factory and shipped with cryptographic signatures, SBOMs, and provenance attestations. By building every artifact from source daily and applying CVE patches under contractual SLAs, Chainguard allows engineering teams to replace vulnerable open source components without manual patching, enabling secure-by-default software development and dramatically simplifying compliance with frameworks such as FedRAMP, PCI DSS, HIPAA, and CMMC.


### Key capabilities

- 2,000+ minimal, zero-CVE container images built daily from source in SLSA L3-compliant Chainguard Factory
- Malware-resistant language libraries for Python, Java, and JavaScript with end-to-end supply chain integrity
- Minimal, zero-CVE virtual machine images for multi-cloud and on-premises environments
- Cryptographically signed SBOMs and Sigstore-based provenance attestations for every artifact
- Industry-leading CVE remediation SLA: 7 days for critical, 14 days for high/medium/low
- FIPS-validated and STIG-hardened images for FedRAMP, CMMC, and regulated-sector compliance
- Wolfi OS-based minimal base images with 60–80% fewer packages than standard alternatives
- Chainguard Console for managing images, entitlements, pull tokens, and user access
- Custom Assembly tooling and Private APK Repositories for image customization



### Target users

- Platform and DevOps engineers managing container image pipelines at enterprises
- Application security (AppSec) teams seeking to reduce CVE triage overhead
- Compliance and GRC teams targeting FedRAMP, CMMC, PCI DSS, or HIPAA certification
- CISOs and security leaders at regulated industries (defense, finance, healthcare, government)
- Engineering leaders at cloud-native companies building on open source at scale
- Government contractors and public-sector technology teams requiring FIPS/STIG compliance



### Key use cases

- Eliminating CVE backlogs in container image pipelines without manual patching
- Achieving and maintaining FedRAMP, FedRAMP High, and cATO accreditation
- Securing AI/ML workloads with hardened, GPU-enabled container and VM images
- Continuous compliance with PCI DSS, HIPAA, SOC 2, CMMC 2.0, and NIS2
- Standardizing enterprise Golden Image programs across engineering organizations
- Protecting software supply chains from malicious package injection attacks
- Accelerating developer platform adoption with secure-by-default open source artifacts
- Reducing engineering toil associated with vulnerability triage and remediation

Integrations ecosystem: Chainguard integrates with leading open source and enterprise vulnerability scanners including Snyk, Grype, Trivy, AWS Inspector, Wiz, GitLab, CrowdStrike, and Qualys. For artifact management, it supports JFrog Artifactory, Cloudsmith, Harbor, Nexus, Google Artifact Registry, Docker Hub, Amazon ECR, and Microsoft ACR—allowing images to be pulled directly or mirrored. Container images are available via major cloud marketplaces including AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud. Chainguard uses Sigstore for cryptographic artifact signing and supports SLSA provenance attestations. CI/CD integration is offered via Chainguard Actions (GitHub Actions). The platform is compatible with OpenSCAP and SCAP Viewer for STIG validation. Cursor (AI coding platform) partnership announced in 2025 brings secure-by-default open source into agentic development workflows.
Pricing summary: Chainguard uses subscription licensing across three product lines. Containers: a Free tier provides up to 5 images (latest tag only, no CVE SLA); Per-Image licensing is priced by image count and type (base, app, AI/ML, FIPS); Catalog licensing providing access to 2,000+ images starts at $19K for a team of 10, scaled non-linearly by engineering org size. Libraries: licensed per language ecosystem (Python, Java, JavaScript) based on developer headcount; quote-based only. VMs: Per-Image or Catalog licensing, both quote-based. Volume, multi-product bundle, startup/SMB, and government/public-sector pricing discounts are available. Once artifacts are mirrored to a customer's own registry they are retained perpetually.
Review summary: Chainguard earns strong reviews driven by the immediate, measurable impact of its zero-CVE images on vulnerability backlogs and developer productivity. G2 reviewers consistently praise the drop-in replacement quality of container images, ease of CI/CD pipeline integration (particularly with JFrog Artifactory and GitLab), responsive customer support, and the fast CVE remediation cadence. Primary criticisms center on pricing perceived as high for smaller teams, an initial Dockerfile adaptation learning curve for Wolfi OS migration, occasional documentation gaps behind new features, and authentication friction with legacy tooling. Overall sentiment reflects high satisfaction among enterprise security and platform engineering teams, with cost and complexity as the main friction points.
Competitive positioning: Chainguard occupies a distinct 'secure-by-default open source artifacts' niche within DevSecOps and supply chain security. Unlike traditional AppSec vendors that scan for vulnerabilities after software is built (SAST, DAST, SCA), Chainguard eliminates vulnerabilities at the source by continuously rebuilding every open source component from scratch inside a SLSA L3-compliant factory with cryptographic attestations and signed SBOMs. This proactive model—'prevention over detection'—directly challenges incumbent container security players (Aqua Security, Wiz) and open source vulnerability management tools (Snyk, Endor Labs, Socket) by reducing scanner noise and CVE backlog rather than just surfacing it. Chainguard's proprietary Wolfi OS and daily-rebuild infrastructure serve as key technical moats, and its compliance-ready FIPS/STIG images provide strong pull in regulated and public-sector markets where competitors offer only scanning or runtime protection.
Limitations: Pricing is enterprise-oriented and frequently cited by G2 reviewers as expensive, particularly for smaller teams and individual users. Catalog licensing starts at $19K for a team of 10 for containers, with libraries and VMs quote-based only. Users note an initial learning curve adapting existing Dockerfiles to Chainguard's Wolfi OS-based images. Documentation occasionally lags product updates, and modern OIDC-based authentication can create integration friction with platforms lacking that support. Some users report missing image coverage that complicates full service migration. The company operates as a fully remote, private entity with no physical offices, which may present procurement or support perceptions in some enterprise contexts.


### Source urls

- https://chainguard.dev/
- https://www.chainguard.dev/pricing
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/chainguard-raises-356-million-in-series-d-funding-to-be-the-safe-source-for-all-open-source-302435220.html
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/chainguard-announces-280-million-growth-financing-from-general-catalyst-to-usher-in-next-era-of-trusted-open-source-software-302592279.html
- https://www.g2.com/products/chainguard/reviews
- https://www.gartner.com/reviews/vendor/chainguard
- https://www.chainguard.dev/customers/securing-trust-in-the-data-cloud-snowflakes-journey-with-chainguard
- https://www.geekwire.com/2025/cybersecurity-startup-chainguard-lands-356m-now-valued-at-3-5b/
- https://www.chainguard.dev/unchained/announcing-chainguards-series-d-building-the-safe-source-for-all-open-source
- https://salesforceventures.com/perspectives/chainguard-ceo-dan-lorenc-on-securing-open-source-resisting-the-urge-to-reinvent-enterprise-sales/

Reviewed at: 2026-04-28T23:07:21.053+00:00


### Customer outcomes

| Customer | Summary | Metric |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Snowflake | Adopted Chainguard Images to manage container CVEs; applications moved from hundreds or thousands of vulnerabilities to zero almost overnight. Enabled Snowflake to achieve FedRAMP High accreditation within required timelines. | Vulnerability counts reduced to zero across multiple applications; FedRAMP High authorization achieved |
| Anduril | Deployed Chainguard Containers to deliver hardened, compliance-ready images for defense use cases, with Chainguard cited as dramatically reducing engineering toil for application security and platform teams. | Not available |
| Appian | Used Chainguard Containers to reduce the burden of patching and hardening in highly regulated and government-sector deployments, enabling developers to focus on product innovation instead of vulnerability remediation. | Not available |
| Shift5 | Leveraged Chainguard STIG-ready Images to streamline audit and compliance readiness for U.S. defense programs; a process previously described as grueling now takes only minutes. | Not available |



### Reviews breakdown

| Platform | Score | Score max | Review count | Url |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| G2 | 4.8 | 5 | 51 | https://www.g2.com/products/chainguard/reviews |
| Gartner Peer Insights | 5 | 5 | 1 | https://www.gartner.com/reviews/vendor/chainguard |



### Review themes



#### Praised

- Immediate and dramatic reduction in container CVE counts
- Drop-in replacement for standard public images with no pipeline rework
- Easy integration with JFrog Artifactory and GitLab CI/CD
- Responsive and proactive customer support
- Fast CVE remediation cadence with contractual SLA
- Broad image catalog covering many languages and frameworks
- Secure-by-default model reduces developer security burden
- Continuous innovation and expanding product portfolio



#### Criticized

- High pricing, especially for smaller teams and individual developers
- Learning curve migrating Dockerfiles to Wolfi OS base images
- Documentation occasionally lags behind new features
- Authentication friction with platforms lacking modern OIDC support
- Missing images for some niche use cases requiring migration workarounds
- Vulnerable code in non-executable library/mod files creates administrative overhead




### Company facts

Founded year: 2021
Hq: Kirkland, Washington, USA (remote-first, no physical offices)


#### Founders

- Dan Lorenc
- Matt Moore
- Kim Lewandowski
- Ville Aikas
- Scott Nichols

Employees range: 350-700
Total funding: $892M
Valuation: $3.5B
Arr: ~$40M (FY2025)
Customer count: 150+
Status: Private


Readiness: Not available


## Ranking

| Display name | Pair count | Total pairs | Presence percent | Avg position |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Snyk | 42 | 150 | 28.000000000000004 | 24.479166666666668 |
| Endor Labs | 37 | 150 | 24.666666666666668 | 22.924050632911392 |
| Checkmarx | 31 | 150 | 20.666666666666668 | 21.4875 |
| Wiz | 28 | 150 | 18.666666666666668 | 22.822580645161292 |
| Semgrep | 24 | 150 | 16 | 25.216666666666665 |
| Veracode | 14 | 150 | 9.333333333333334 | 26.181818181818183 |
| Jit | 9 | 150 | 6 | 23.666666666666668 |
| Aqua Security | 7 | 150 | 4.666666666666667 | 32.25 |
| SonarSource | 6 | 150 | 4 | 23.25 |
| Socket | 4 | 150 | 2.666666666666667 | 6.375 |
| GitGuardian | 3 | 150 | 2 | 28.7 |
| Chainguard | 0 | 150 | 0 | Not available |



## Platform breakdown

| Platform | Prompt count | Presence rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| google-ai-mode | 0 | 0 |
| perplexity | 0 | 0 |
| chatgpt-search | 0 | 0 |
| google-ai | 0 | 0 |
| bing-copilot-search | 0 | 0 |
| xai-search | 0 | 0 |



## Strengths





## Gaps

| Prompt text | Competitor presence count |
| --- | --- |
| Which security scanning tools are best at reducing noise so developers actually act on alerts instead of ignoring them? | 5 |
| Which software supply chain security tools detect malicious packages, not just known vulnerable versions? | 5 |
| Which application security tools offer the best IDE-native experience vs. CI-only scanning — and what are the tradeoffs for developer adoption? | 4 |
| Which application security platforms go beyond known CVEs to detect logic-level vulnerabilities and misconfigurations? | 4 |
| Which SAST tools have the lowest real-world false positive rates and the best tooling for managing them at scale? | 4 |



## Topic scores

| Topic name | Prompt count | Cited prompt count |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability | 5 | 0 |
| Developer Experience | 5 | 0 |
| Integrations & Ecosystem | 5 | 0 |
| Performance & Reliability | 5 | 0 |
| Setup & First Run | 5 | 0 |



## Prompt results

- Prompt text: What secrets management tools are best for a small startup team to ensure developers never commit credentials to the repo?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| GitGuardian | 28 |


- Prompt text: I'm rolling out a software composition analysis tool across an engineering org — which platforms have the smoothest onboarding for large teams?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Checkmarx | 12 |
| SonarSource | 27 |
| Wiz | 28 |


- Prompt text: Which security scanning platforms handle availability well so a critical fix can still ship even if the scanning service goes down temporarily?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 4 |
| Snyk | 8 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Wiz | 6 |
| Checkmarx | 7 |
| Aqua Security | 41 |
| Snyk | 65 |


- Prompt text: Which DevSecOps platforms handle vulnerability prioritisation well when there are hundreds of findings across multiple repositories?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |
| Wiz | 6 |
| Semgrep | 8 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 2 |
| Semgrep | 7 |
| Endor Labs | 9 |
| Checkmarx | 11 |
| Wiz | 14 |
| Jit | 17 |
| Aqua Security | 36 |


- Prompt text: Which SAST tools integrate into an existing CI pipeline without slowing down developer velocity?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 2 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 10 |
| Snyk | 38 |
| Semgrep | 52 |


- Prompt text: Which application security tools offer the best IDE-native experience vs. CI-only scanning — and what are the tradeoffs for developer adoption?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 2 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 2 |
| SonarSource | 4 |
| Veracode | 6 |
| Semgrep | 10 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Checkmarx | 6 |
| Snyk | 13 |
| Veracode | 16 |
| Semgrep | 25 |
| SonarSource | 45 |


- Prompt text: What tools cover SAST, DAST, and SCA in one platform — and which do teams use to cover all three vulnerability types without tool sprawl?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Veracode | 3 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 1 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 3 |
| Snyk | 25 |
| Veracode | 32 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Jit | 4 |
| Checkmarx | 7 |
| Wiz | 15 |
| Endor Labs | 22 |
| Veracode | 49 |


- Prompt text: Which application security scanning tools are fastest at scale and least likely to slow down PR pipelines as the codebase grows?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 8 |
| SonarSource | 10 |
| Checkmarx | 12 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 6 |
| Checkmarx | 20 |
| Semgrep | 22 |
| Wiz | 26 |
| Jit | 33 |


- Prompt text: Which runtime application security tools have the lowest production overhead and are safe to run on high-traffic services?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 53 |
| Snyk | 57 |


- Prompt text: Which DevSecOps platforms have the best two-way integration with ticketing systems for tracking vulnerability remediation end to end?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |
| Wiz | 10 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Veracode | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 4 |
| Wiz | 27 |
| Snyk | 35 |
| Endor Labs | 84 |


- Prompt text: Which security scanning tools are best at reducing noise so developers actually act on alerts instead of ignoring them?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Snyk | 7 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |



##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 9 |
| Snyk | 29 |
| Wiz | 43 |


- Prompt text: Which enterprise application security platforms scale best when scanning thousands of repositories across multiple teams?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Veracode | 7 |
| Snyk | 13 |
| Checkmarx | 14 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 4 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Checkmarx | 6 |
| Wiz | 7 |
| Semgrep | 34 |
| Snyk | 89 |


- Prompt text: Which security scanning platforms have the best support for SBOM generation workflows for compliance and audit requirements?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 18 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |
| Endor Labs | 16 |
| Checkmarx | 19 |
| Jit | 21 |
| Aqua Security | 24 |


- Prompt text: What cloud security posture management tools integrate well with container and orchestration platform security scanning?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 8 |
| Checkmarx | 9 |
| Jit | 19 |
| Aqua Security | 49 |


- Prompt text: Which application security tools integrate natively into the pull request workflow so findings can block or warn on merges?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |
| Semgrep | 6 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 2 |
| Snyk | 13 |
| Veracode | 14 |
| Semgrep | 29 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| SonarSource | 7 |
| Endor Labs | 13 |
| Wiz | 31 |
| Veracode | 33 |
| Snyk | 43 |


- Prompt text: Which security vendors update their vulnerability databases fastest after major CVE disclosures like Log4Shell?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 10 |
| Endor Labs | 21 |
| Checkmarx | 45 |
| Snyk | 60 |


- Prompt text: Which software supply chain security tools detect malicious packages, not just known vulnerable versions?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |
| Socket | 3 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Socket | 1 |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Socket | 1 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 1 |
| Snyk | 6 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 2 |
| Veracode | 5 |
| Snyk | 9 |
| Endor Labs | 11 |
| Socket | 20 |


- Prompt text: What security tooling do teams typically use for managing findings across dozens of repositories from a single security engineer workflow?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 3 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 3 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 3 |
| Wiz | 23 |
| Endor Labs | 39 |


- Prompt text: Which application security platforms are best at communicating vulnerabilities to developers in an actionable way rather than just generating noise?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 2 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 2 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Semgrep | 12 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Wiz | 7 |
| Veracode | 14 |
| Checkmarx | 18 |
| Snyk | 35 |
| Semgrep | 62 |


- Prompt text: What are the best container image scanning tools that catch vulnerabilities before images are pushed to production?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Aqua Security | 1 |
| Snyk | 3 |



##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Aqua Security | 3 |
| Wiz | 4 |
| Jit | 11 |
| Checkmarx | 12 |


- Prompt text: Which application security platforms go beyond known CVEs to detect logic-level vulnerabilities and misconfigurations?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 1 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 3 |



##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 3 |



##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 3 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 21 |
| Endor Labs | 61 |


- Prompt text: What are the best software supply chain security tools for a polyglot monorepo with Node.js, Python, and Go services?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 6 |
| Wiz | 8 |
| Jit | 14 |
| Snyk | 39 |
| Aqua Security | 67 |


- Prompt text: Which secret scanning tools are best at both detecting credentials in git history and preventing new secrets from being committed?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| GitGuardian | 6 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| GitGuardian | 4 |
| Jit | 5 |
| Checkmarx | 20 |


- Prompt text: Which DevSecOps tools integrate best with SIEM platforms for correlating app security findings with infrastructure events?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 1 |
| Veracode | 2 |



##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |
| Snyk | 20 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 2 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 24 |
| Endor Labs | 34 |
| Wiz | 47 |
| Jit | 54 |
| Snyk | 57 |


- Prompt text: Which SAST tools have the lowest real-world false positive rates and the best tooling for managing them at scale?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 3 |



##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 3 |
| Veracode | 5 |
| Checkmarx | 7 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Wiz | 4 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 26 |
| SonarSource | 29 |
| Veracode | 36 |
| Semgrep | 47 |





## Top sources





## Response excerpts

| Prompt text | Platform | Excerpt |
| --- | --- | --- |
| What are the best software supply chain security tools for a polyglot monorepo with Node.js, Python, and Go services? | google-ai | Chainguard Cyber Security News * Why it fits: For deployment, Chainguard provides minimalist, Zero-CVE container images tailored for Go, Python, and Node.js. |
| What are the best software supply chain security tools for a polyglot monorepo with Node.js, Python, and Go services? | bing-copilot-search | Supply Chain Security Tools 2026: Picks by Use Case Artifacts leaving\| JFrog Xray, Chainguard\| JFrog provides signing and custody of artifacts; Chainguard offers hardened, zero-CVE base images for containers. |
| Which software supply chain security tools detect malicious packages, not just known vulnerable versions? | bing-copilot-search | ...nst supply-chain malware [Top 10 Best SCA Tools in 2026 [Ranked List]](https://cybersecuritynews.com/best-sca-tools/) Chainguard\| Provides hardened, minimal, continuously rebuilt container base images\| Eliminates risk at the source by shipping “ze... |



## Competitor excerpts

| Platform | Competitor name | Excerpt |
| --- | --- | --- |
| google-ai-mode | Endor Labs | 9 Best SAST Tools in 2026: Accuracy, Speed, and Noise Compared \| Blog \| Endor Labs[Noisy security scanners make apps less secure - Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/VibeCodersNest/comments/1rbf05f/noisy_... |
| perplexity | Semgrep | For first-party code, I’d shortlist Semgrep; for dependency vulnerabilities, Snyk. |
| chatgpt-search | Semgrep | ## 1. Semgrep Best for low-noise code scanning Semgrep combines static application security testing (SAST), dependency scanning, and secrets detection. |
| chatgpt-search | Endor Labs | Semgrep website ## 2. Endor Labs Best for dependency alert noise Its standout capability is function-level dependency reachability: determining whether an application can actually execute vulnerable code in a dependency. |
| google-ai | Endor Labs | Endor Labs: Highly effective at cutting dependency noise (by up to 90%+) by mapping deep function-level call graphs. |
| google-ai-mode | Endor Labs | [Kodem Security] * Endor Labs (Package Firewall) — Combines function-level reachability analysis with package security policies and firewall capabilities to screen against suspicious or malicious open-source packages at install time. |
| google-ai-mode | Socket | Socket - Block zero-day supply chain attacksSocket.dev: Detecting Supply Chain Attacks Before They Hit Leading tools specialized in or capable of detecting... |
| perplexity | Socket | Socket — analyzes dependency code and metadata for signs such as unexpected install scripts, network or shell access, obfuscation, and typosquatting. |
| chatgpt-search | Socket | ## Tools worth shortlisting ## 1. Socket Strongest fit for proactive detection Analyzes dependency source code, metadata, and maintainer activity for suspicious behavior, including obfuscated code, unexpected install scripts, network access, typosqu... |
| google-ai | Checkmarx | Checkmarx The primary tools designed to detect malicious packages and suspicious package behavior include: ### 1\. |
| google-ai-mode | Checkmarx | Snyk, Semgrep, and GitHub Advanced Security (GHAS) offer the leading IDE-native security experiences, whereas legacy platforms like Veracode, Checkmarx (traditional configuration), and Fortify lean heavily on CI-only or delayed pipeline scanning. |
| perplexity | Semgrep | ## Short answer For security findings while code is being written, Semgrep and Snyk are the clearest IDE-first choices in the search results. |



## Trend

Visibility delta: -1
Avg position delta: Not available
Citation count delta: -2