Comparison

SecPortal vs Endor Labs
delivery workspace vs reachability-driven SCA console

Endor Labs is a next-generation Application Security platform built around reachability analysis: program analysis decides whether a known vulnerability in an open-source dependency is actually invoked from application code before it is raised to a developer. The product line extends from Open Source SCA into Secrets, AI Models, Container, SAST, SBOM Hub, and CI/CD policy gating on the same console. SecPortal is a different shape: scanning, manual finding entry, AI report generation, branded client portal, retesting, and the engagement record live inside one workspace. This page is the side-by-side for buyers comparing a reachability-driven SCA and code security console above the codebase to a delivery workspace that scans, reports, and delivers on its own.

No credit card required. Free plan available forever.

FeatureSecPortalEndor Labs
Primary use case
Security delivery workspace with scanning, findings, AI reports, branded client portal, and engagement record on one tenant
Reachability-driven SCA and code security console that classifies vulnerable open-source components as reachable, conditionally reachable, or unreachable and pushes only the reachable class to developers; product line extends into Secrets, AI Models, Container, SAST, SBOM Hub, and CI/CD gating
Engagement model with scope, ROE, and deliverables
Application and repository model rather than scoped engagement
Client model with onboarding, contacts, and access control
Internal application owner, repository owner, and developer model
Branded white-label client portal on your tenant subdomain
Reachability analysis (call graph, framework binding, runtime evidence) for SCA prioritisation
CVSS 3.1 with EPSS, KEV, asset tier, and exposure context on the finding record; no proprietary reachability score on the SCA-only console
Core mechanic; program analysis classifies each vulnerable component as reachable, conditionally reachable, or unreachable so only reachable findings reach developers
Built-in external vulnerability scanning (16 modules: SSL, headers, DNS, ports, subdomains, technology fingerprinting, CVE correlation)
Authenticated web application scanning (DAST, 17 modules)
Code scanning (SAST and SCA via Semgrep)
Native SCA with reachability plus SAST module on the same console
Subdomain enumeration and external attack surface discovery
Secrets scanning
Manual finding entry and Semgrep secrets rules on connected repositories
Endor Labs Secrets module with detector library and validation
AI model risk scoring against Hugging Face and similar registries
Endor Labs AI Models module
Container image SCA
Repository-based dependency analysis; container image scanning is not a native module
Endor Labs Container module with image scan and base-image upgrade plan
Manual finding entry with full editor
Findings originate from scanner output and policy events on the Endor Labs console rather than from operator-authored manual entry
AI-powered narrative report generation (executive, technical, remediation)
Console dashboards, reachability views, and remediation campaign tracking rather than engagement-shaped narrative deliverables
300+ finding templates with remediation guidance
Vendor-curated vulnerability records with reachability annotation and dependency upgrade recommendations
CVSS 3.1 vector parsing and auto-scoring
CVSS on vulnerability records plus proprietary reachability classification on top
Scanner result import (Nessus, Burp Suite, CSV)
SBOM ingest, third-party SCA output ingest, and SARIF ingest rather than bulk import of pentest scanner output
Encrypted credential vault for authenticated scans (AES-256-GCM)
Relies on repository OAuth and CI/CD secrets handling rather than a credential vault for authenticated DAST
SBOM ingest and VEX publishing
Document management with versioning and finding records that hold SBOM and VEX evidence
Endor Labs SBOM Hub module with VEX publishing and ingest
Retest workflow paired to original finding
Re-scan validates closure through the next reachability run
Exception register with eight-field decision chain (named approver, scope, rationale, hard expiry, compensating control, refresh trigger, effective period, framework reference)
Policy violation suppression and per-finding ignore reasons scoped to the dependency or rule rather than an engagement-shaped per-finding decision chain
Compliance framework templates
21 frameworks including OWASP, OWASP ASVS, OWASP MASVS, OWASP API Security Top 10, ISO 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS, NIST 800-53, NIST 800-171, FedRAMP, MITRE ATT&CK, DORA, NIS2, CIS Controls, and Essential Eight
Per-finding categorisation against OWASP, CWE, and licence-risk classifications derived from the dependency record and SBOM
Continuous scheduled scanning cadence (daily, weekly, biweekly, monthly)
Continuous repository monitoring and on-pull-request gating run through Endor Labs CI/CD integrations rather than a workspace-configured scan schedule
Scan-to-scan diff and change-event generation across scheduled runs
Reachability and dependency change views derived from continuous repository monitoring
Integrated invoicing and Stripe Connect payments for engagements
Activity audit trail with CSV export
Platform audit logs inside the Endor Labs tenant
MFA enforcement on every workspace
SSO and IdP-driven controls inside the customer tenant
Free plan available
Sales-led commercial pricing rather than a published free tier
Pricing model
Free, Pro, Team
Sales-led with annual commitment, priced on application or repository count, contributor or developer count, and modules in scope (Open Source, Secrets, AI Models, Container, SAST, SBOM Hub, CI/CD)
Setup time
2 minutes
Named account onboarding, repository connection across the engineering org, call-graph analysis baseline, reachability calibration, policy library tuning, and CI/CD integration before the first reachable finding lands
Best fit for
AppSec teams, internal security teams, vulnerability management teams, product security teams, pentest firms, MSSPs, and consultancies that want scanning, findings, AI reports, branded portal, and the engagement record on one workspace
Mid-market and enterprise AppSec or product security teams already operating Snyk, Mend, Black Duck, Sonatype, JFrog Xray, or GitHub Advanced Security across hundreds or thousands of repositories who feel the noise tax from transitively unreachable vulnerable components and want a reachability-driven console above the codebase

SecPortal vs Endor Labs: delivery workspace vs reachability-driven SCA console

Endor Labs is a next-generation Application Security platform organised around the open-source component graph and reachability analysis. The core mechanic is to run program analysis (call graphs, framework binding inference, runtime evidence) across the codebase, classify each vulnerable open-source component as reachable, conditionally reachable, or unreachable, and push only the reachable class to developers so the team is not paying a noise tax on transitively pulled-in components that no application code path can ever invoke. The product line extends from Open Source (SCA with reachability) into Secrets, AI Models, Container, SAST, SBOM Hub, and CI/CD policy gating on the same console.

SecPortal is a different category. SecPortal is a security delivery workspace that carries the engagement, the findings, the scanning, the AI report, the branded client portal, the retest workflow, and the invoice all on one tenant. The buyer is an AppSec team, a product security team, a vulnerability management team, an internal security team, a penetration testing firm, an MSSP, or a consultancy that ships work to clients, business units, or auditors. If you are comparing a reachability-driven SCA and code security console above an existing codebase to a delivery workspace that scans, reports, and delivers on its own, this page is the side-by-side. The adjacent comparisons buyers in the SCA and AppSec console categories often evaluate alongside are SecPortal vs Snyk, SecPortal vs Mend.io, SecPortal vs Sonatype, SecPortal vs Black Duck, SecPortal vs JFrog Xray, SecPortal vs Semgrep and SecPortal vs GitHub Advanced Security.

Where Endor Labs stops for engagement-shaped delivery

These are not Endor Labs-specific criticisms; they are properties of a reachability-driven SCA and code security console when you compare it to running scoped engagements or a scanner-plus-findings programme on a single workspace.

Built as a next-generation SCA with reachability analysis, not a security delivery workspace

Endor Labs is organised around the open-source component graph: program analysis traces the package import, the call graph, the framework binding, the container image, the Kubernetes manifest, and the runtime evidence to decide whether a known vulnerability in a dependency is actually reachable from application code before the platform raises it as an issue. The buyer is an AppSec or product security leader with a mature SCA programme who is paying the noise tax on Snyk, Mend, Black Duck, Sonatype, or GitHub Advanced Security and wants reachability-driven prioritisation, secrets scanning, container image SCA, AI code review, AI model risk scoring, SBOM and VEX publishing, and CI gates on one console. SecPortal is a different shape: scanning, manual finding entry, AI report generation, branded client portal, retesting, and the engagement record live inside one workspace with SAST and dependency analysis through Semgrep on connected GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket repositories sitting alongside external scanning, authenticated DAST, and the engagement record.

No engagement, scope, or scoped deliverable model

Endor Labs is organised around the application identity, the repository, the call-graph reachability score, the policy rule, the build gate decision, the SBOM publishing record, and the continuous remediation campaign rather than around a scoped engagement that opens with a kickoff, runs against a defined target list, ships a final report under a client or stakeholder name, schedules a retest, and closes on a delivery date. If the work being shipped is a penetration test, an external attack surface programme, an AppSec code review with a contract scope, a third-party security review, a vulnerability assessment, or a client-billable security assessment with a defined deliverable, Endor Labs does not carry that record. SecPortal does, on the same workspace as the scanner stack, the AI report generator, and the branded client portal.

No branded client portal on a tenant subdomain

Endor Labs output (the reachable-finding inventory, the dependency upgrade plan, the SBOM and VEX publish event, the AI code review comment, the policy violation, the CI build gate decision) is reviewed inside the Endor Labs console or routed to developers through native IDE plug-ins, pull request annotations, and CI integrations against GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Jenkins, CircleCI, and similar build systems. Sharing the result with an application owner, a business stakeholder, an auditor, or an external client typically means a Endor Labs console invite, a PDF export, or a ticket in a downstream system. SecPortal serves a white-label client portal on the tenant subdomain so every finding, retest, remediation thread, and report download lives under your team or consultancy brand rather than a vendor console.

No external perimeter scanning or authenticated DAST inside the same workspace

Endor Labs covers the code and dependency side of the application: open-source SCA with reachability, first-party SAST through program analysis, secrets scanning, IaC and container image scanning, AI code review against pull requests, AI model risk scoring against Hugging Face and similar registries, and SBOM and VEX publishing. It does not run external perimeter scanning across DNS, ports, SSL, headers, subdomains, technology fingerprinting, and CVE correlation against the public-facing attack surface, and it does not run authenticated DAST against logged-in user journeys behind cookie, bearer, basic, or form authentication on the same console. Engagements that pair open-source supply chain coverage with running-application testing and external perimeter coverage need a separate DAST and a separate external scanner. SecPortal runs SAST and dependency analysis through Semgrep, external scanning across 16 modules, and authenticated DAST against verified domains on the same engagement record.

No manual finding entry for non-scanner output

Endor Labs is a scanner-and-policy-driven console. Findings appear in the workspace because the call-graph analyser flagged a reachable component, the policy engine fired against an application identity or a build event, the secrets scanner matched a credential pattern, the container image scan found a vulnerable layer, the AI code reviewer raised a finding against a pull request, or an SBOM ingest landed a record from outside. A pentest, a manual code review, a manual SCA review against a private dependency, a threat-modelling output, or a third-party security review also produces findings the scanner cannot reach: business logic flaws, chained exploits, manual SSRF or IDOR proofs, authentication bypasses through application-specific state, design-level weaknesses, and supply-chain-tampering walkthroughs not yet in the data set. SecPortal ships a full manual finding editor with a 300+ finding template library, CVSS 3.1 vector parsing and auto-scoring, and structured evidence so non-scanner findings live on the same record as scanner output.

Sales-led procurement with reachability-driven pricing

Endor Labs is sales-led commercial software. Pricing is custom and typically structured on the application or repository count, the contributor or developer count, the modules in scope (Open Source, Secrets, AI Models, Container, SAST, SBOM Hub, CI/CD), and an annual commitment. There is no published price page for the commercial tiers and no monthly self-serve commercial tier for a small team running a single engagement. SecPortal pricing is transparent on the website with a free plan, monthly Pro and Team tiers, and no annual minimum on the Pro and Team tiers.

How a reachability-driven SCA console and a delivery workspace see the same problem differently

Reachability-driven SCA is a useful framing, but the buyer should be clear-eyed about what a noise-suppression console above the codebase gives you and what it costs in scope. The contrast below is between a platform that derives value from classifying vulnerable open-source components by reachability and a delivery workspace that holds the full engagement record on the tenant where the operators run.

Reachability-driven SCA suppresses unreachable vulnerable components

Endor Labs and adjacent reachability-driven SCA platforms start from the assumption that a known vulnerability in a transitively pulled-in dependency that is never invoked from application code does not deserve developer attention. The economic value of the platform comes from running program analysis (call graphs, framework binding inference, runtime evidence ingest) against the codebase, classifying each vulnerable component as reachable, conditionally reachable, or unreachable, and suppressing the unreachable class so that developers only see findings that an exploit path could traverse from application code. The platform becomes the prioritisation and noise-suppression layer above the open-source supply chain.

A delivery workspace records every finding, scanner-derived or operator-entered, on the engagement record

SecPortal does not assume that reachability classification is the only path to prioritisation, and does not assume that the right shape is a console above the SCA scanner alone. The workspace records every finding on the engagement record: SAST and dependency analysis from Semgrep on connected repositories, authenticated DAST findings, external scanner findings across 16 modules, bulk-imported Nessus or Burp Suite output, and operator-authored manual findings from the tester or reviewer all sit on the same record. Prioritisation runs through CVSS 3.1 vector parsing, EPSS and KEV enrichment on the finding record, asset and exposure context written by the operator, and the eight-field exception register that holds the deferral decision under audit, rather than through a single proprietary reachability score on the SCA-only console.

The right answer depends on whether SCA-only noise suppression or engagement-shaped delivery is the bottleneck

If the AppSec or product security team already runs an SCA platform across hundreds of applications, the noise tax from transitively unreachable vulnerable components is the bottleneck the next investment has to solve, and the engineering org runs on GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, or Azure DevOps with mature pull request and CI gating, Endor Labs is the right shape. If the team needs the scanner stack, the engagement record, the AI report, the branded portal, the manual finding entry, and the invoice on one workspace without a stack of separate scanner contracts and without a separate SCA-only reachability console above them, a delivery workspace like SecPortal is the right shape. Both can be true for different teams; one is the right shape for a given buyer at a given time.

Who each platform is the right fit for

Endor Labs and SecPortal solve different problems for different buyers. The honest answer is that the right tool depends on whether you are suppressing reachability noise on an existing SCA estate or running scoped engagements and findings on one workspace.

Endor Labs fits AppSec and product security teams paying a reachability noise tax on an existing SCA

If you are a mid-market or enterprise AppSec or product security team, you already operate Snyk, Mend, Black Duck, Sonatype, JFrog Xray, GitHub Advanced Security, or another SCA platform across hundreds or thousands of repositories, the noise tax from transitively pulled-in unreachable vulnerable components is the bottleneck the team feels every week, and the engineering org runs on GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, or Azure DevOps with mature pull request and CI gating, Endor Labs was built for that prioritisation shape. The buyer assumption is one platform sitting above the codebase that classifies each vulnerable component as reachable, conditionally reachable, or unreachable and pushes only the reachable class to developers.

SecPortal fits teams who want scanning, findings, AI reports, and delivery on one workspace

If you are an AppSec team, a product security team, a vulnerability management team, an internal security team, a penetration testing firm, an MSSP, or a consultancy that wants the scanner, the finding record, the AI report, the branded portal, the manual finding entry, the retest workflow, and the invoice all on one tenant, SecPortal carries that lifecycle without forcing the team to license separate SCA, SAST, DAST, external, container, and secrets scanners and stitch their output through a reachability-driven prioritisation console above them.

SecPortal fits buyers who deliver findings to clients, business units, or auditors under their own brand

If you ship reports to external clients, business unit owners, or auditors, and every finding, retest, remediation thread, and report download has to live under your brand rather than under a vendor console, SecPortal is the workspace that holds that record. Findings can still be imported from Nessus, Burp Suite, or CSV when scanners outside SecPortal are part of the picture, alongside SecPortal native external, authenticated, and code scanning. The same record also serves an internal team that wants the deliverable shape (executive summary, technical writeup, remediation roadmap, retest closure pack) without licensing a separate writeup tool above a reachability console.

Transparent pricing, no procurement cycle

SecPortal pricing is published on the website and self-service from sign-up. There is no annual contract floor on the Pro or Team tiers, no per-application or per-contributor licensing model, and no sales call required before you can run a real engagement.

SecPortal Free

Free forever

1 user, 3 clients, 2 engagements per client, 3 AI credits, 6 core scan modules.

SecPortal Pro

From $149/month

All scan modules, 100 clients, 25 AI credits/month, branded client portal, invoicing, compliance tracking.

SecPortal Team

From $299/month

Up to 5 users, 75 AI credits/month, team management, activity audit trail with CSV export, MFA enforcement.

Why teams pick SecPortal over Endor Labs

  • Run scoped engagements with a kickoff, deliverables, retests, and a final invoice on one record instead of an SCA-only reachability console scoped to dependency findings on connected repositories
  • Pair SAST and dependency analysis through Semgrep on connected GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket repositories with external scanning across 16 modules and authenticated DAST against verified domains on the same engagement record
  • Generate executive, technical, and remediation deliverables with Claude from the live findings record rather than exporting a console PDF after the reachability pass
  • Deliver findings through a branded client portal on your tenant subdomain instead of through a vendor console invite plus a ticket in the downstream system
  • Pair every retest to the original finding so the closure record holds up under audit, instead of waiting for the next reachability run to re-surface or fail to re-surface the finding
  • Document CVSS, EPSS, KEV, asset tier, and exposure context on the engagement record so prioritisation is defensible to a board, an auditor, or an application owner without licensing a separate reachability engine
  • Map findings across 21 framework templates including OWASP, OWASP ASVS, OWASP MASVS, OWASP API Security Top 10, ISO 27001, SOC 2, PCI DSS, NIST 800-53, NIST 800-171, FedRAMP, MITRE ATT&CK, DORA, NIS2, CIS Controls, and Essential Eight
  • Store privileged scan credentials encrypted at rest with AES-256-GCM and rotate them through the in-product credential vault for authenticated DAST runs
  • Invoice clients or business units directly from the engagement record through Stripe Connect
  • Start on the free plan and upgrade without a sales call, an annual commitment, a contributor-count audit, or a repository-count audit

Related reading

If you are evaluating how to run an in-house AppSec, product security, or vulnerability management programme rather than pay for a reachability-driven SCA console above the codebase, the pages below cover the workflows, signals, and adjacent comparisons that come up most often.

When the work is the engagement record your team operates, not a reachability-driven SCA console above the codebase

Run scoped AppSec, pentest, vulnerability management, and supply-chain engagements, generate AI reports, and ship findings through a branded portal on one workspace. SAST plus dependency analysis through Semgrep plus DAST plus external scanning live on the same engagement record alongside manual finding entry, the exception register, the retest workflow, and the activity audit trail. Pair alongside an Endor Labs reachability deployment when reachability-driven SCA on the engineering codebase sits next to engagement-shaped delivery for application owners, auditors, or external clients. Start free.

No credit card required. Free plan available forever.