Red Siege
Last updated: Nov 4, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Red Siege's?
These tables compare the solutions of the two providers, attribute by attribute. Use them to compare the solutions for the cybersecurity requirements of your company. To learn what each attribute means, read the descriptions of the attributes.
Organization
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Red Siege |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | MPT |
| Extras | None | None | Purple team and red team |
| Headcount | 186 | Same | 17 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 42%, IT 12%, sales 16%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 24% | Same | Engineering 6%, IT 41%, sales 6%, marketing 6% and others 41% |
| Headcount growth | +3%, +21%, +29% | Same | +13%, +6%, +42% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | US |
| Countries | AR, BO, BR, CL, CO, CR, DO, EC, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | US |
| Reputation | 9.27 from 388 reviews over 7 years on Clutch, G2 and Gartner | Same | No reviews |
| Followers | 23K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube | Same | 28.9K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | None |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2017 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | None |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 1M to 10M |
| Third-Party CVEs Discovered | 289 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | None |
| Compliance | GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, ISO/IEC 27017:2015, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, ISO/IEC 27701:2019, PCI DSS, SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3 | Same | None |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 64K per month. Top 3: 18% CO, 9% US, 5% BR. Others 68% | Same | 9.6K per month. Top 3: 41% GB, 27% US and 13% IN. Others 19% |
| Authority | 33 out of 100 | Same | 26 out of 100 |
| Public vulnerability DB | Discovered and third-party | Same | None |
| Content | Blog, documentation, e-books, glossary, reports, success stories, videos, webinars and white papers | Same | Blog, reports, videos and webinars |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections | Same | No |
| Community | Forum | Same | Chat (Discord) |
| Sync training | 1 workshop | Same | 2 live training courses |
| Async training | 3 product use courses, all free | Same | No |
| Distribution | Direct or with any of its 14 partners | Same | Direct |
| Marketplaces | AWS | Same | None |
| Freemium | No | No | No |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | No |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open demo | No | No | No |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | No information available |
| Minimum term | Monthly | Monthly | No information available |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | No information available |
| Minimum capabilities | ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets | Same plus: AI SAST, API security testing, MAST, PTaaS, RE and SCR | MPT |
| Minimum scope | 10 authors | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | No information available |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No information available |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No information available |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Red Siege |
|---|---|---|---|
| PTaaS | No | Yes | No. MPT |
| Reverse engineering | No | Yes | No information available |
| Secure code review | No | Yes | No information available |
| Pivoting | No | Yes | Yes |
| Exploitation | No | Yes | Yes |
| Manual reattacks | Not applicable | Unlimited reattacks | No information available |
| Zero-day vulnerabilities | Scanner-based zero-day vulnerability detection | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research | None |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy, availability and response | No information available |
| Minimum availability | 99.95% per year | Same | No information available |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | No |
| Accreditations | CNA and Penetration Testing by CREST | Same | None |
| Pentester certifications | Not applicable | 202 from 59 different types | 45 from 31 different types |
| Type of contract | Employee | Same | Employee or Freelance |
| Endpoint control | No | Total | No information available |
| Channel control | No | Total | No information available |
| Standards | Some requirements from 67 standards | All requirements from the same standards | None |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, automated tools and human intelligence | Automated tools and human intelligence |
| Remediation | 5, none in common | Same, plus 1 | 1 |
| Output | 5, 1 in common and 4 additional | Same, plus 2 | 1 in common |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Red Siege |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | No |
| IDE | 5 functionalities | Same, plus 1 functionality | No |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | No |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | No |
| Vulnerability sources | 18 sources | Same | None |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS, Fixing cost, KEV, Reachability, Transitivity, Use and VLAI | Same | No information available |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | None |
| SCA | 21 package managers | Same | No |
| AI security | No | Yes | No |
| Reachability | 14 languages | Same | No |
| Reachability type | Deterministic | Same | Not applicable |
| SBOM | 24 package managers | Same | No |
| Malware detection | Yes | Yes | No |
| Autofix on components | No | No | No |
| Containers | 4 distributions | Same | No |
| Source SAST (languages) | 14 | Same | No |
| Source SAST (frameworks) | 23 | Same | No |
| Custom rules | No | No | No |
| IaC | 6 | 2 | No |
| Binary SAST | 1 type of binary | Same, plus 2 types of binaries | No |
| DAST | 7 attack surface types | Same | No |
| API security testing | No | 4 types of APIs | No |
| MAST | No | Yes | No |
| IAST | No | No | No |
| CSPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| Secrets | 313 secrets types | Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | No |
| AI | 5 functions | Same | No |
| AI SAST | No | Yes | No |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open-source | No | No | GNU General Public License v2.0, GNU General Public License v3.0 and MIT License |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | No |
| Regions | US | Same | None |
| Status | Yes | Yes | No |
| Incidents | 3 per year | Same | No information available |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Red Siege |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6 | Same | None |
| Binary repositories | None | None | None |
| Ticketing | 3 | Same | None |
| ChatOps | None | None | None |
| IDE | 3 | Same | None |
| CI/CD | 23 | Same | None |
| SCA | Native | Same | None |
| Container | Native | Same | None |
| SAST | Native | Same | None |
| DAST | Native | Same | None |
| MAST | None | Native | None |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Cloud | 1 | Same | None |
| CSPM | Native | Same | None |
| Secrets | Native | Same | None |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | None |
| Compliance | None | None | None |
Fluid Attacks last updated these tables on 2026-10-13. The primary source of information was redsiege.com. Fluid Attacks also used specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Red Siege
Free trial — Search for vulnerabilities in your applications at no cost with the automated security testing of Fluid Attacks. Start your 21-day free trial and see the benefits of the Essential plan. The Advanced plan includes the expertise of the pentesting team of Fluid Attacks. To get the Advanced plan, complete this contact form.
Tags
compareexploitationmptopensourcepivotingrt