Invicti vs TruffleHog
Feature checklists rarely decide anything. What decides it is the pricing metric, who has to write the tests, and which limitation you can live with.
Entry price
Quote on request
Quote onlyFree tier available
Free tierWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Enterprise licensing by number of target sites or applications.
Free CLI; the enterprise platform adds continuous monitoring and reporting, priced on request.
Free tier
Demo and trial on request.
Open-source CLI is free and fully functional including verification.
Open source
AGPL-3.0
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Established
Invicti Security · since 2009
Widely used
Truffle Security · since 2016
Strengths
- Proof-based scanning eliminates most false-positive triage, which is the main cost of DAST.
- Handles authenticated scanning of modern JavaScript applications well.
- Good asset discovery for organisations that do not know all their own sites.
- Live verification cuts false positives to near zero for supported providers.
- Free and easy to add as a pre-commit hook or CI step.
- Scans far beyond git — buckets, images, logs.
Limitations
- Expensive relative to free DAST alternatives.
- Scans take time and are not suited to per-commit feedback.
- Dynamic testing alone cannot find everything a code review would.
- No dashboard or workflow in the free CLI.
- Verification requires outbound network calls, which some environments block.
- Full-history scans on large repositories are slow.
Best for
Organisations with many web applications and no capacity to triage scanner noise.
Teams that want free, high-signal secret scanning in the pipeline today.
All of these integrate with: Jenkins.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.