Security review, handled. Then a scan of the repository you already have. Suggested fixes. Aevral, Claude Security, and Codex Security compete for the same jobs. Aevral is not a lab: it runs on open-source models, processed in the US today, with an EU-only option announced. Compare the current coverage and workflow in two even, dated tables, then explore the sixteen tools in the wider field.
The numbers behind the claims sit in the eval receipts.
The even comparisons
Claude Security is Anthropic's code scanning product. It scans a codebase, validates findings, and suggests patches for human review. An even table on nine rows, dated and sourced: job, coverage, models, price, seats, where it runs, fix path, trust, and availability.
Read the even table
Codex Security is OpenAI's application security agent. It finds, confirms, and fixes vulnerabilities through repository scans, Security Review on pull requests, and proposed patches. An even table on nine rows, dated and sourced: job, coverage, models, price, seats, where it runs, fix path, trust, and availability.
Read the even table
Overlaps the job
These tools publish security scope that touches Aevral's job: scans or reviews for logic, authentication, or access-control issues. Each page carries the split: what they publish, what Aevral reads, and how they run together.
Different job
These tools state a different job on the same repositories. Each page shows the boundary in one table and a worked example of Aevral's reading.
Yes. All three review pull requests and scan repositories for security flaws, and suggest fixes. Aevral is an AI security reviewer for GitHub pull requests, not a lab; it runs on open-source models, processed in the US today, with an EU-only option announced. The tables state today's coverage, access, and fix paths so you can evaluate them for your repository.
They are named competitors for the same jobs. Each gets a dated, sourced comparison across the same nine rows. Ten of the sixteen alongside tools also publish security scope that overlaps, and six state a different job. Their pages explain the published scope; the table format does not imply that only the labs compete.
No. The competitor tables compare published jobs and current product facts. The alongside pages also show a worked example of Aevral's reading. Results on your code depend on your code; evaluations belong to you.
Install the GitHub App and PR review starts on. Sign in with GitHub to connect it, then press Scan for the repository you already have.
For professional use. By installing, you confirm you can act for the account or organization that owns it, and you accept the Terms and DPA on its behalf.