| Ecosystem | 0 | 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 16 decomposed | 10 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Performs static code analysis across multiple programming languages by parsing source code into abstract syntax trees (AST) and pattern-matching against vulnerability signatures. The system scans repositories without executing code, identifying injection flaws, hardcoded secrets, unsafe API usage, and logic errors. Results are returned within 30 seconds for typical codebases by leveraging incremental scanning and caching of previously analyzed files.
Unique: Combines AST-based SAST with AI-driven triaging that reduces false positives by 92% (per testimonials) by analyzing exploitability context rather than flagging all pattern matches. This two-stage approach (detection + AI filtering) differs from traditional SAST tools that rely solely on rule-based matching.
vs alternatives: Faster initial results (30 seconds) than competitors like Snyk or Checkmarx due to incremental scanning, and lower noise through AI triaging that prioritizes findings by actual attack feasibility rather than theoretical risk.
Scans open-source dependencies declared in package managers (npm, pip, Maven, Go modules, etc.) and matches them against a continuously-updated CVE database to identify known vulnerabilities. Generates Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) in standard formats, tracks dependency versions, and identifies outdated packages. The system performs transitive dependency analysis to detect vulnerabilities in indirect dependencies that may not be explicitly declared.
Unique: Integrates SCA with AI-driven exploitability analysis that filters CVEs by actual attack surface in the user's codebase (e.g., flagging a vulnerable function only if it's actually imported and called). This reduces false positives from CVEs that don't affect the specific application context.
vs alternatives: Provides faster SCA results than Snyk or Dependabot by caching CVE data locally and using incremental scanning; AI triaging reduces noise by 92% compared to traditional SCA tools that flag all known CVEs regardless of exploitability.
Deploys an in-application firewall (Zen) that monitors and blocks injection attacks (SQL injection, command injection, etc.) and enforces rate limiting at runtime. The firewall instruments the application to intercept dangerous operations (database queries, system commands, etc.), validates inputs against attack patterns, and blocks or logs suspicious requests. This provides runtime protection for vulnerabilities that may not be caught by static or dynamic testing.
Unique: Provides in-application runtime protection that understands application semantics (e.g., recognizing SQL injection patterns in database queries) rather than just blocking at the network level. This semantic understanding enables more accurate attack detection and fewer false positives than traditional WAF rules.
vs alternatives: More effective than network-level WAF because it operates inside the application and understands application-specific context; faster than patching vulnerabilities because it provides immediate protection while remediation is in progress.
Detects and blocks bot traffic and API abuse by analyzing request patterns, behavioral signatures, and anomalies. The system identifies automated attacks (credential stuffing, account enumeration, scraping, DDoS) by recognizing patterns like identical requests from different IPs, rapid-fire requests from single sources, and requests that deviate from normal user behavior. Blocking can be enforced through rate limiting, CAPTCHA challenges, or request rejection.
Unique: Uses behavioral analysis and pattern recognition to identify bots based on request patterns and deviations from normal user behavior, rather than relying on static IP blacklists or user-agent strings. This approach adapts to new bot techniques and reduces false positives by understanding legitimate user behavior.
vs alternatives: More effective than traditional rate limiting because it understands behavioral patterns and can distinguish between legitimate high-volume clients and malicious bots; more adaptive than static bot detection rules because it learns from traffic patterns.
Integrates Aikido scanning into CI/CD pipelines to automatically scan code, dependencies, and infrastructure on every commit or pull request. The integration includes policy enforcement gates that block merges if findings exceed configured thresholds, automated remediation through pull request creation, and detailed scan reports in CI/CD logs. Supports GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Jenkins, and other CI/CD platforms through webhooks and API integrations.
Unique: Provides deep CI/CD integration that not only scans code but also enforces security policies as merge gates and automatically creates remediation pull requests — creating a complete shift-left security workflow. This end-to-end integration reduces manual security review overhead.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than standalone security scanning tools because it integrates scanning, policy enforcement, and remediation into a single CI/CD workflow; faster feedback to developers because results appear directly in pull requests rather than requiring separate dashboard checks.
Provides IDE plugins (VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, etc.) that show security vulnerabilities inline as developers write code. The plugin displays vulnerability warnings, provides quick-fix suggestions, and integrates with Aikido's AI triaging to show only relevant findings. Developers can view detailed vulnerability information, see remediation suggestions, and apply fixes directly from the IDE without leaving their development environment.
Unique: Brings security scanning into the IDE with real-time feedback and AI-driven triaging that shows only relevant findings — reducing context-switching and alert fatigue. The plugin integrates with IDE quick-fix mechanisms to enable one-click remediation.
vs alternatives: More developer-friendly than standalone security dashboards because vulnerabilities appear inline in the editor where developers are already working; faster feedback loop than waiting for CI/CD scan results because scanning happens in real-time as code is written.
Detects malware and malicious code in source code, dependencies, and binaries using proprietary threat intelligence (Aikido Intel) combined with pattern matching and behavioral analysis. The system identifies known malware signatures, suspicious code patterns (e.g., cryptominers, backdoors, data exfiltration), and dependencies with malicious intent. Findings include threat classification, severity, and remediation guidance.
Unique: Combines signature-based malware detection with behavioral analysis and proprietary threat intelligence (Aikido Intel) to identify both known malware and suspicious code patterns that may indicate compromise. This multi-layer approach catches sophisticated supply chain attacks that signature-only detection would miss.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than dependency scanning tools like Snyk because it detects malware and malicious intent, not just known CVEs; more effective than static code analysis because it uses behavioral analysis and threat intelligence to identify suspicious patterns.
Scans open-source dependencies to identify license types and detect license compliance violations. The system maintains a database of common open-source licenses (MIT, Apache 2.0, GPL, AGPL, etc.) and flags dependencies with restrictive or incompatible licenses. Provides reports showing license distribution across the codebase and recommendations for replacing incompatible dependencies.
Unique: Integrates license scanning with compliance policy enforcement that can block dependencies with incompatible licenses in CI/CD pipelines. This proactive approach prevents license violations from being introduced rather than discovering them after deployment.
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than FOSSA or Black Duck because it integrates license scanning with other security scanning (SAST, SCA, etc.) in a single platform; faster compliance reporting because license data is collected during dependency scanning rather than requiring separate analysis.
+8 more capabilities
Aggregates 67 TB of source code from the Software Heritage archive, filtering for permissively licensed repositories (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, etc.) across 600+ programming languages. Uses automated license detection and validation to ensure legal compliance for model training. Implements a rigorous deduplication pipeline at file and repository levels to eliminate redundant training data and reduce dataset bloat.
Unique: Largest open-source code dataset at 67 TB with automated opt-out governance allowing repository owners to request removal, combined with rigorous deduplication and PII removal pipeline — no other public dataset offers this scale with legal compliance and community control mechanisms
vs alternatives: Larger and more legally compliant than GitHub's CodeSearchNet (14M files) or Google's BigQuery public datasets, with explicit opt-out governance vs. implicit inclusion, and covers 600+ languages vs. Codex training data's undisclosed language distribution
Implements a community-driven opt-out system where repository owners can request removal of their code from the dataset without legal takedown notices. Maintains a registry of excluded repositories and re-applies exclusions during dataset updates. Provides transparent governance documentation and a clear submission process for removal requests, balancing open access with creator rights.
Unique: First large-scale code dataset to implement opt-out governance at dataset level rather than relying solely on license compliance, with transparent registry and community submission process — shifts power from dataset creators to code contributors
vs alternatives: More respectful of creator autonomy than GitHub Copilot's training approach (no opt-out) or academic datasets (one-time snapshot), and more scalable than individual DMCA takedowns
The Stack v2 scores higher at 61/100 vs Aikido Security at 55/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Automated pipeline that scans source code for personally identifiable information (email addresses, API keys, SSH keys, credit card patterns, phone numbers) and removes or redacts them before dataset release. Uses regex patterns, entropy-based detection for secrets, and heuristic rules to identify sensitive data. Operates at file level with configurable sensitivity thresholds to balance data utility against privacy risk.
Unique: Combines regex pattern matching, entropy-based secret detection, and heuristic rules in a unified pipeline with configurable sensitivity — more comprehensive than simple regex-only approaches, but trades off false positive rate against security coverage
vs alternatives: More thorough than GitHub's secret scanning (which only flags known patterns) because it includes entropy-based detection for unknown secret formats, but less accurate than specialized tools like TruffleHog due to language-agnostic approach
Indexes 67 TB of source code across 600+ programming languages with language-aware metadata (syntax, file extension, language family). Enables retrieval by language, license, repository, or code patterns. Uses Software Heritage's existing indexing infrastructure as foundation, augmented with language detection and classification. Supports both bulk download and filtered queries for specific language subsets.
Unique: Leverages Software Heritage's existing language detection and indexing infrastructure, then augments with BigCode-specific language classification and filtering — avoids reinventing language detection while providing dataset-specific query capabilities
vs alternatives: More comprehensive language coverage (600+ languages) than GitHub's Linguist (500+ languages) and more accessible than Software Heritage's raw API because it's pre-filtered for permissive licenses and deduplicated
Removes duplicate code files and repositories using content hashing (SHA-256 or similar) and fuzzy matching for near-duplicates. Operates in two stages: exact deduplication via hash matching, then fuzzy matching (e.g., Jaccard similarity or MinHash) to catch semantically identical code with minor formatting differences. Preserves one canonical copy of each unique code pattern while removing redundant training examples.
Unique: Two-stage deduplication combining exact hash matching with fuzzy similarity matching (likely MinHash or Jaccard) to catch both identical and near-identical code — more thorough than single-stage approaches but computationally expensive
vs alternatives: More aggressive deduplication than CodeSearchNet (which uses simple hash matching) because it catches near-duplicates, but less semantic than clone detection tools (which understand code structure) because it's content-based
Integrates with Software Heritage's comprehensive archive of 200+ million repositories and their full version control history. Extracts source code snapshots from Software Heritage's Git/Mercurial/SVN repositories, preserving repository metadata (commit history, author info, timestamps). Provides access to code at specific points in time, enabling historical analysis or training on code evolution patterns.
Unique: Leverages Software Heritage's universal code archive (200M+ repositories) as data source, providing access to code that would be impossible to collect via GitHub API alone — enables training on archived/deleted repositories and non-GitHub platforms (GitLab, Gitea, etc.)
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than GitHub-only datasets because it includes code from GitLab, Gitea, SourceForge, and other platforms archived by Software Heritage; more legally defensible than web scraping because it uses an established, community-maintained archive
Tracks and validates SPDX license identifiers for each repository, ensuring only permissively licensed code (MIT, Apache 2.0, BSD, etc.) is included. Maintains license metadata alongside code files, enabling downstream users to verify legal compliance. Implements license hierarchy and compatibility checking to handle dual-licensed or complex licensing scenarios.
Unique: Combines automated SPDX detection with manual review and maintains license metadata alongside code, enabling downstream users to verify compliance — more transparent than datasets that simply claim 'permissive licenses' without proof
vs alternatives: More legally rigorous than GitHub's CodeSearchNet (which doesn't validate licenses) and more transparent than Codex training data (which doesn't disclose license filtering at all)
Maintains versioned snapshots of the dataset (e.g., v2.0, v2.1) with documented changes between versions (new repositories added, deduplication improvements, PII removal updates). Provides checksums and manifests for reproducibility, enabling researchers to cite specific dataset versions and reproduce results. Tracks dataset lineage and transformation history.
Unique: Maintains semantic versioning and detailed changelogs for dataset releases, enabling researchers to cite specific versions and understand dataset evolution — more rigorous than one-off dataset releases without versioning
vs alternatives: More reproducible than academic datasets that are released once without versioning, and more transparent than commercial datasets (Codex) that don't disclose version history or changes
+2 more capabilities