Head-to-Head Comparison

DryRun Security vs OX Security

Start with a change that violates one of your application’s security requirements. Compare how OX and DryRun review it, explain the result and support repair. DryRun brings automated adversarial investigation and application context into that workflow, with configured merge controls and guidance for supported coding agents.

Active ASPM — Active ASPM with real-time pipeline enforcement, PBOM, native AST scanners, and compliance automation

Compare with another tool

Compare with: Snyk Code Snyk Evo GHAS Claude Security Codex ZeroPath DepthFirst Corgea Aikido Semgrep Sonar Corridor OX Security Qwiet AI Socket Wiz Code

DryRun Leads

Tie

OX Security Leads

Capabilities Compared

Capability	DryRun Security	OX Security	Verdict
Detection Categories1
What this tool covers	ℹ PR and repository security review, dependency analysis, secrets analysis and Terraform IaC review. Active-secret verification is attempted where supported. Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3 · Source 4 · Source 5	ℹ OX lists SAST, SCA, secrets/PII, IaC and containers for OX Code. Source 1 · Source 2	—
AI & Intelligence9
AI-Native Architecture	✓ Automated adversarial review combines security agents, application context and deterministic analysis. Source 1 · Source 2	~ Documents static code analysis and VibeSec coding guidance; contextual AI remediation is described by OX. Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3	DryRun leads
Agentic / Multi-Agent System	✓ PR review and repository investigations use specialized security agents and evaluations. Source	✗ (platform with VibeSec AI engine, not multi-agent)	DryRun leads
Natural Language Policies	✓ Natural-language requirements are evaluated against code context; configured findings can fail required source-control checks. Source 1 · Source 2	✗ (no-code workflow builder for policies, but not natural language)	DryRun leads
Model-Independent Verification	✓ DryRun security evaluation is separate from developer or supported coding-agent repair. Changed code receives fresh review. Source	✗ VibeSec AI is a scanning layer, not an independent verification of model output.	DryRun leads
Code Security Knowledge Graph	✓ PR reviews and DeepScan both build and use the DryRun Security Context Graph.	✗ ASPM aggregates findings; no first-party code security graph.	DryRun leads
Cross-repo Analysis	✓ DryRun looks locally first and, when needed, automatically investigates relevant context, such as authorization logic, across repositories it has permission to access.	✗ —	DryRun leads
Code Security Memory	✓ Retained application context and feedback inform later investigations; changed code receives fresh review. Scanner-excluded candidates and human dismissals are distinct records. Source	✗ —	DryRun leads
Custom DryRun Cyber Models	✓ DryRun reports training and optimizing models for security analysis, including a security-finding classifier. Source 1 · Source 2	✗ —	DryRun leads
Multi-model Architecture	✓ Routes each task to the best-fit model rather than relying on a single LLM.	✗ —	DryRun leads
AI Coding Agent Security6
Securing AI-Generated Code	✓ Reviews human- and AI-written code in connected, configured workflows. Source	~ VibeSec supplies security guidance to supported coding agents through an installed integration. Source 1 · Source 2 · Source 3	DryRun leads
AI Coding Visibility / Observability	✓ Code Insights with AI Assistance (beta): NL queries for risk, trends, exposure; org-wide visibility; per-repo drill-down; file-level security history	✗ ASPM dashboard; no AI-coding-specific observability.	DryRun leads
Malicious AI Agent Skill Detection	✓ Policy Library includes Malicious AI Agent Skills Detection: flags skills/plugins that could enable data theft, backdoors, or code execution	✗ No dedicated AI-agent skill scanning.	DryRun leads
MCP Integration	✓ DryRun Insights MCP server: security summaries, PR analysis, trend monitoring, file-level history; connects via Direct HTTP, Claude Shortcuts, or mcp-remote	~ MCP server provides security data and selected actions in Early Access. Source	DryRun leads
Continuous Enforcement Layer	✓ Configured PR findings fail checks; required source-control protections enforce the customer’s merge policy. Source	✓ Configured pipeline workflows can block execution when security conditions are met. Source 1 · Source 2	Tie
Per-Review Economics (predictable vs. usage-metered)	✓ Flat subscription pricing based on team size. Usage pricing applies to DeepScan product.	✓ Enterprise subscription.	Tie
Code Security Intelligence3
Business Logic Flaw Detection	✓ Investigates authorization and business-logic vulnerabilities such as IDOR and tenant-isolation failures. Source	✗ (pattern-based scanning, not logic-aware)	DryRun leads
Git Behavioral Analysis	✓ DeepScan uses Git Behavioral Graphs for churn, temporal coupling, knowledge decay, anomalies and intent analysis. Source	✗ Not available	DryRun leads
Continuous Baseline & Risk Trending	✓ Risk Register with Critical/High/Medium/Low severity; AI Assistance for Insights with NL queries, trend monitoring, and 30-day window analysis	✓ Dashboard tracks severity and issue-state trends over time; coverage depends on connected sources and completed scans. Source	Tie
Workflow & Supply Chain2
SCM Support	✓ GitHub and GitLab (native apps with OAuth)	✓ GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure Repos; hosting options and permissions vary by connector. Source	Tie
SBOM / AI-BOM Generation	✓ Provides dependency SBOMs and an AI-BOM inventory. Source 1 · Source 2	✓ OX Code builds a dependency SBOM from connected source, pipeline and container data. Source 1 · Source 2	Tie
Reporting & Compliance1
Compliance Framework Mapping (SOC 2, PCI, NIST, OWASP, MISRA, STIG)	~ Findings and reporting include CWE/OWASP context and evidence useful to compliance review. Source 1 · Source 2	✓ OX’s published example links findings to SOC 2 CC8.1, NIST SA-11 and ISO 27001 A.8.28. Source	Competitor leads
Market Feedback (G2)4
G2 Rating / Review Count	ℹ 4.9/5 (19 reviews) — g2.com/products/dryrun-security/reviews	ℹ G2 snapshot: 4.8/5 from 51 OX Security reviews, observed October 31, 2026 (Central). Source	—
Notable G2 Praise (Attributed)	ℹ "DryRun goes far beyond what rule-based SAST tools offer. It catches things other tools completely miss — like middleware that's defined but never mounted, or trust boundary misalignments." — Jabez A., Director, Product Security Architecture, Enterprise (g2.com/products/dryrun-security/reviews)	ℹ Dudi E. praised lifecycle visibility, usability and DevOps integration (G2, December 8, 2024). Source	—
Notable G2 Criticisms (Attributed)	ℹ "I do somewhat wish there were more customization options for tuning the analyzers, but that seems to be in the works." — Kyle R. (g2.com/products/dryrun-security/reviews)	ℹ Dudi E., Co-Founder and CEO, described an initial learning curve from the many options and analytics (G2, December 8, 2024). Source	—
Common G2 Complaint Themes	ℹ UI/portal speed; desire for more analyzer customization (g2.com/products/dryrun-security/reviews)	ℹ Historical reviewers cited onboarding complexity and integration friction; Tom B. reported language gaps in November 2024. Current prevalence is unverified. Source	—

Ready to see DryRun Security in action?

Get a personalized demo and see how DryRun compares on your codebase.

Get a Demo

DryRun Security vs OX Security

Ready to see DryRun Security in action?

Your cookie choices