StackHawk is best for
Developer-first runtime testing
Choose StackHawk when a CI/CD-native runtime testing workflow is the central requirement and developer-owned scan configuration is the operating model.
Eresus Guard vs StackHawk
Both products test running applications. StackHawk is a strong fit for teams centering runtime tests in the developer workflow. Eresus Guard is built for teams that also need a cloud workbench for scanning, finding triage, and reviewable evidence across their AppSec program.
Public-source review:
The useful distinction is workflow.
Eresus Guard is best for
Evidence-first AppSec operations
Choose Eresus Guard when the team needs a shared AppSec workbench for authorized scanning, triage, and evidence alongside source and dependency coverage.
Compare the operating model, not a checkbox count.
| Decision area | StackHawk | Eresus Guard |
|---|---|---|
| Primary workflow | Runtime testing integrated into developer workflows, including CI/CD, staging, local development, and production. | Authorized application and API assessments managed through a cloud workbench for scanning, triage, and evidence review. |
| Scan configuration | Configuration-as-code with stackhawk.yml, with hosted configuration available for teams that prefer central management. | Assessment setup and review live with the project workspace and its evidence. |
| Finding reproduction | Findings include the triggering request and response plus an auto-generated cURL command for local reproduction. | Findings keep HTTP records, OAST callbacks, and replayable cURL with the assessment record. |
| Coverage context | Source-connected discovery maps testable applications and APIs before runtime testing. | SAST, DAST, and software-composition coverage can be reviewed in the same application-security workspace. |
| Best fit | Engineering-led teams optimizing a developer-first runtime-testing loop. | AppSec teams and service providers that need one reviewable operational workspace across scans, findings, and evidence. |
A public-product comparison, not a scorecard.
Eresus Security publishes Eresus Guard. We compare StackHawk's current public product description with Eresus Guard's documented scope, and state where each workflow fits rather than declaring a universal winner.
StackHawk workflow statements on this page are based on StackHawk: How Does StackHawk Work?. Product capabilities change; review the linked source during procurement.
What evaluators usually need to know.
Is Eresus Guard a StackHawk replacement?
It depends on the workflow. StackHawk is well suited to teams whose central requirement is CI/CD-native runtime testing. Eresus Guard is better suited to teams that need a shared workbench for authorized scans, triage, evidence review, and broader AppSec coverage.
Do both products support dynamic testing of running applications?
Yes. StackHawk describes runtime testing across CI/CD, staging, production, and local development. Eresus Guard supports authorized dynamic application and API assessments from its cloud workbench.
Map the right security workflow before you buy.
Bring your CI/CD, assessment, and evidence requirements. We will show the corresponding Eresus Guard workflow.