Compare
Up to three tools. The table shows the data as-is, without picking a “best”.
| Field | Lychee | Gitleaks | act |
|---|---|---|---|
| Platforms | Universal | Universal, GitHub | GitHub |
| Local support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Paid API | No | No | No |
| License | MIT OR Apache-2.0 | MIT | MIT |
| Stars | 4057 | 30430 | 72471 |
| Last activity | October 26, 2026 | October 23, 2026 | — |
| Install complexity | — | LOW | — |
| Category | Testing, Workflow | Security, Git, DevOps | Testing, Git, DevOps |
| Best use | For documentation authors and small teams checking references locally or in CI. Start with a specific file and interpret findings; it does not establish complete site or login functionality. | Best for an individual developer or small team that wants a local pre-commit secret scan plus a second CI gate. It is especially useful around deployment configuration and environment files. It does not replace a secret manager or credential revocation after a leak. | Best for a developer or small team that repeatedly edits GitHub Actions workflows and wants to test a job before pushing. It provides a local run log, while a final GitHub check remains necessary. It is not suitable when exact hosted-runner parity is required. |