{}Best AI Code Security

Legit Security vs Endor Labs for AI code security

ANSWER FIRST

Legit Security scores 4.4 and Endor Labs 3.9 on our AI code security criteria, so Legit Security ranks higher on the published weights. Legit leads on endpoint deployment and tamper resistance, pricing and buying clarity and remediation and ASPM depth; Endor Labs leads on developer experience; they tie on AI code and assistant coverage and governance and policy control. The widest gap is endpoint deployment and tamper resistance, where Legit scores 5.0 against 2.5.

Editorial assessment · Compiled from vendor product, docs, pricing and marketplace pages · Rated October 2026

How do Legit Security and Endor Labs score side by side?

Legit Security and Endor Labs: editorial assessment, 0-5. Last reviewed October 2026.
CriterionWeightLegit SecurityEndor LabsEdge
Coverage of AI-generated code and AI coding assistants25%5.05.0Tie
Endpoint deployment and tamper resistance20%5.02.5Legit
Governance and policy control for the CISO20%4.54.5Tie
Developer experience and low friction15%3.54.0Endor Labs
Pricing and buying clarity10%2.52.0Legit
Remediation and ASPM depth10%5.04.5Legit
Weighted total4.43.9

Legit Security leads on 3 criteria, Endor Labs leads on 1, and 2 are tied.

Legit Security

Verdict for Legit Security: strengths and limitations

diff --verdict legit-security · reviewed 2026-09

@@ strengths @@

  • Strength:VibeGuard 2.0 (3 Aug 2026) discovers coding agents on the developer endpoint, blocks dangerous operations, secures MCP use and resists tampering. [source]
  • Strength:Named support for Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Windsurf and MCP-based assistants. Codex: supported (per Legit). [source]
  • Strength:Runs SAST and SCA inside the IDE and keeps secrets from being shared with AI systems during generation. [source]
  • Strength:Secrets scanning covers Git history, Jira, Confluence, Slack and developers' personal GitHub accounts. [source]
  • Strength:ASPM core pulls in existing scanners and de-duplicates findings, scored by business and exposure context. [source]

@@ limitations @@

  • Limitation:No prices, pricing unit or free tier published. [source]
  • Limitation:No self-serve start for a single developer or a small team. [source]
  • Limitation:Reachability is not the headline prioritization method on the pages reviewed. [source]

Endor Labs

Verdict for Endor Labs: strengths and limitations

diff --verdict endor-labs · reviewed 2026-09

@@ strengths @@

  • Strength:Reachability analysis across dependencies, containers and first-party code. [source]
  • Strength:AURI inventories coding agents, models, MCP servers and skills and applies policy at the moment of action. [source]
  • Strength:MCP server for Cursor, Claude Code, VS Code with Copilot, Codex and Antigravity. [source]
  • Strength:Free Developer tier runs locally with no account. [source]

@@ limitations @@

  • Limitation:Core and Pro prices are not published. [source]
  • Limitation:Free tier has no UI, policies or scan history. [source]

How do Legit Security and Endor Labs cover AI code and coding assistants?

Legit Security: VibeGuard discovers every AI model, code assistant, MCP server and skill on developer endpoints and runs SAST and SCA in the IDE. Legit names Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Windsurf and Amazon Q Developer. Codex: supported (per Legit).

Endor Labs: AURI inventories coding agents, models, MCP servers and skills, and the MCP server installs into Cursor, Claude Code, VS Code with Copilot, Codex and Antigravity. AI SAST traces dataflow across repositories and pull requests.

Assistants named on their public pages: Legit Security: Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Windsurf and OpenAI Codex (Codex: supported (per Legit)); Endor Labs: Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot and OpenAI Codex.

Where do their controls run on the developer machine?

Legit Security: VibeGuard 2.0 is built "as a full desktop app, and not as a plugin", and its anti-tampering stops agents or threat actors "from disabling VibeGuard". A secrets MCP backed by the OS keychain scopes credentials to the session and keeps them out of agent history and memory.

Endor Labs: Runs locally through an MCP server (npx endorctl ai-tools mcp-server) and AURI agents that run inside Claude Code, Cursor, OpenAI Codex and Google Antigravity on customer infrastructure; an endpoint application and tamper resistance are not described.

How much control does the security team get?

Legit Security: A central management console lets security teams approve, block or flag assistants, models and MCP servers and enforce custom or built-in command policies. Audit-log detail specific to VibeGuard is not covered on the public pages reviewed; the platform states an audit trail for policy compliance. Ask Legit for specifics during evaluation.

Endor Labs: AURI applies policy at the moment of action with an audit trail, and mutating agent actions sit behind approval gates; scoping policy by team or machine is not described.

How do they fit the developer's workflow?

Legit Security: Reaches developers through the IDE, a CLI and MCP, and surfaces dangerous operations for the developer to decide rather than blocking them silently, but there is no free or self-serve tier.

Endor Labs: The free Developer tier runs locally with no account.

How do they fix and prioritize findings?

Legit Security: Agentic remediation fixes first-party SAST and dependency (SCA) findings and opens pull requests; risk is ranked by business context and reachability, and findings from existing scanners are consolidated.

Endor Labs: Reachability across dependencies, containers and code, and AURI agents write SAST fixes and open SCA upgrade pull requests behind approval gates. Ingestion of third-party scanner findings is not confirmed.

How do they compare on price?

Legit Security: free tier: No (free trial on request); lowest published paid option: AWS Marketplace: $60,000 for 12 months, all modules, 100 users (marketplace price); pricing unit: Users (marketplace bundle).

Endor Labs: free tier: Yes: Developer tier, local, no account; lowest published paid option: Contact sales; pricing unit: Contributors with commits in the last 90 days.

Source: Legit Security pricing · Reviewed Sep 2026

Source: Endor Labs pricing · Reviewed Sep 2026

Which should you choose?

Choose Legit Security if endpoint deployment and tamper resistance and remediation and ASPM depth matter most: Legit scores 5.0 and 5.0 there, against 2.5 and 4.5 for Endor Labs. Choose Endor Labs if developer experience and AI code and assistant coverage matter most: Endor Labs scores 4.0 and 5.0 there, against 3.5 and 5.0 for Legit.

Frequently asked questions

Is Legit Security or Endor Labs better for AI code security?

Legit Security scores 4.4 and Endor Labs 3.9 on our AI code security criteria, so Legit Security ranks higher on the published weights. Legit leads on 3 of 6 criteria and Endor Labs on 1; 2 are tied. Which is better depends on which criteria matter most to you; the calculator on this site re-weights them.

How do Legit Security and Endor Labs price their plans?

Legit Security: free tier: No (free trial on request); lowest published paid option: AWS Marketplace: $60,000 for 12 months, all modules, 100 users (marketplace price). Endor Labs: free tier: Yes: Developer tier, local, no account; lowest published paid option: Contact sales. Prices as published on vendor pages and marketplace listings, reviewed 2026-10-11.

Which AI coding assistants do Legit Security and Endor Labs name?

On the pages we reviewed, Legit Security names Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Windsurf and OpenAI Codex (Codex: supported (per Legit)) and Endor Labs names Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot and OpenAI Codex. 'Not named' means we did not find the assistant on the vendor's pages; it does not prove the tool cannot work with it.

Read the full reviews

Where next?

More head-to-heads

Sources reviewed

Legit Security

Endor Labs

Last reviewed October 2026. Editorial assessment from public vendor material; no hands-on testing.