Appcanary
by Appcanary · Discontinued server vulnerability monitoring, shut down June 2018
BenchRank score
Screenshots of Appcanary
Homepage
Overview
Appcanary monitored the software installed on customers' servers and alerted them when a version had a known vulnerability. It was sold as three products — an API, a server agent and monitor alerting — alongside a public vulnerability browser and the isitvulnerable.com lookup. The team joined GitHub and the service stopped operating on 1 June 2018.
- Best for
- Nobody currently — the service stopped operating on 1 June 2018 and took no new signups.
- Pricing
- No prices appear in the captured text; the service is no longer sold and existing customers were billed only until it closed.
Strengths and trade-offs
Strengths
- Agent watched servers for software with known vulnerabilities
- Sold as three parts: an API, a server agent and alerting
- Ran a public vulnerability browser and isitvulnerable.com
- Maintained its own vulnerability database, later used by GitHub
Trade-offs
- Shut down on 1 June 2018; new signups stopped in January 2018
- Vendor itself points buyers to GitHub Security Alerts and others
- Captured text is a blog, so features and limits are undocumented
Pricing
Published plans and prices from Appcanary’s own pricing page.
How this score is made up
Each dimension is scored out of 100 and combined into the headline score using fixed weights.
MCP support
Whether an agent can drive the product through the Model Context Protocol, and how much setup that takes.
API quality
Public API surface: machine-readable spec, official SDKs, documented auth, errors, rate limits and versioning.
Documentation
Publicly reachable docs — coverage, freshness, code samples and machine readability.
Agent friendliness
How readable the site is to an automated client: llms.txt, structured data, server-rendered content, crawler access.
Pricing transparency
Whether real prices are published, self-serve signup exists, and usage costs are knowable without a sales call.
Changelog
A public, dated record of what shipped and when — the clearest signal that a product is still alive.
Marketing site structure
Whether the site answers a buyer's questions: clear positioning, the pages that matter, and accessibility.
Page speed
How fast the site loads for real visitors: Chrome UX Report 75th-percentile LCP, INP and CLS, with a Lighthouse mobile run standing in where a site has too little traffic for field data.
Operational trust
Status page and incident history, security disclosure, compliance and data-processing documentation.
Measured, but not part of the score
Useful to know, but not a mark for or against the product — so these do not affect the ranking.
Openness
Source availability, self-hosting, data export and open standards. Scored and shown, but not part of the composite — paid SaaS is not worse for being paid SaaS.
Maintenance
Release cadence and repository activity. Scored and shown, but not part of the composite — it is only measurable for open repositories.
This doesn’t look right — report a problem with Appcanary’s score
Where this comes from
The Appcanary pages BenchRank reads when it scores the product — its documentation, release notes, status and security pages, and its repository where there is one.
Alternatives in Application Security
Ranked 1
83.1 — BenchRank score out of 100Sentry
Sentry · Error tracking and application performance monitoring for developers
Best for: Development teams wanting error monitoring, tracing and session replay tied to one trace
Ranked 2
80.8 — BenchRank score out of 100GrowthBook
GrowthBook · Warehouse-native feature flags, experimentation and product analytics
Best for: Product and engineering teams running feature flags and experiments on their own data warehouse.
Ranked 3
79.4 — BenchRank score out of 100Temps
Temps · Self-hosted deploy platform with built-in analytics, errors and monitoring
Best for: Teams self-hosting deployments who also want analytics, error tracking and uptime on their own server
Is this your product?
Claim Appcanary to manage its profile. Claiming lets you suggest edits to the descriptive fields — it never changes scores or rankings.