Secura
Last updated: Nov 4, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Secura'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.
In 2021, Bureau Veritas bought Secura. In 2024, Secura merged with Security Innovation, which Bureau Veritas also owned. The result is Bureau Veritas Cybersecurity. This comparison is about the merged organization as it is now, which continues to use the Secura brand on some properties.
Organization
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Secura |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | MPT and PTaaS |
| Extras | None | None | Red team |
| Headcount | 186 | Same | 341 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 42%, IT 12%, sales 16%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 24% | Same | Engineering 6%, IT 31%, sales 9%, operations 4% and others 50% |
| Headcount growth | +3%, +21%, +29% | Same | -1%, 0%, +18% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | AE, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, IN, IT, NL, SE and US |
| Countries | AR, BO, BR, CL, CO, CR, DO, EC, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | AE, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, IN, IT, NL, SE and 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 | 39K based on the following: LinkedIn and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | None |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2000 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | No information available |
| Acquisitions | None | None | Acquired 1 time and made 0 acquisitions |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 13M to 42M |
| Third-Party CVEs Discovered | 289 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | 5 CVEs reported to MITRE |
| 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 | ISO 14001:2015, ISO 20000, ISO 45001:2018, ISO 9001:2015, ISO/IEC 17025:2017, ISO/IEC 27001:2013, SG CSA's Cyber Essentials Mark and SOC 2 Type II |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 64K per month. Top 3: 18% CO, 9% US, 5% BR. Others 68% | Same | 5K per month. Top 3: 10% BR, 38% NL and 11% US. Others 41% |
| Authority | 33 out of 100 | Same | 17 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, news, press, success stories, webinars and white papers |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections | Same | No |
| Community | Forum | Same | No |
| Sync training | 1 workshop | Same | 22 workshops |
| 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 | Yes |
| 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 | Monthly |
| 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 and PTaaS |
| Minimum scope | 10 authors | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | Scope size, target, test method and level of support needed |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No information available |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Secura |
|---|---|---|---|
| PTaaS | No | Yes | MPT and PTaaS |
| Reverse engineering | No | Yes | Yes |
| Secure code review | No | Yes | Yes |
| 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 | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research |
| 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 | CCV, Penetration Testing by CREST and Vulnerability Assessment by CREST |
| Pentester certifications | Not applicable | 202 from 59 different types | 114 from 9 different types |
| Type of contract | Employee | Same | Employee |
| Endpoint control | No | Total | No information available |
| Channel control | No | Total | No information available |
| Standards | Some requirements from 67 standards, 10 in common and 57 additional | All requirements from the same standards, 10 in common and 57 additional | 25 standards, 10 in common and 15 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, automated tools and human intelligence | AI, automated tools and human intelligence |
| Remediation | 5, none in common | 6, none in common | 1 |
| Output | 5, none in common | 7, none in common | 2, none in common |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Secura |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | No |
| IDE | 5 functionalities | Same, plus 1 functionality | No |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | No |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | Does not break the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 18 sources | Same | No information available |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS, Fixing cost, KEV, Reachability, Transitivity, Use and VLAI | Same | Business context and CVSS |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | External (XBOW for API security testing and DAST) |
| 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, 1 in common and 6 additional | Same | 1 attack surface type in common |
| API security testing | No | 4 types of APIs, 2 in common and 2 additional | 2 types of APIs, all in common |
| MAST | No | Yes | Yes |
| 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, none in common | Same | 1 |
| AI SAST | No | Yes | No |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open-source | No | No | MIT |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | SaaS (no tenancy information) |
| Regions | US | Same | Asia, Europe and North America |
| Status | Yes | Yes | No |
| Incidents | 3 per year | Same | No information available |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Secura |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Native powered by XBOW |
| 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 sources of information were cybersecurity.bureauveritas.com and secura.com. Fluid Attacks also used specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Secura
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
apiaspmcomparedastexploitationmastmptopensourcepivotingptaasrertscrthreat-modeling