Side by side
CyberSecEval vs LLM Guard
Both stand on llm security tools. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Free plan Open source APILinuxMac+2
CyberSecEval covers several cybersecurity risks as well as defensive capabilities, with distinct benchmarks for code, prompt injection, patch generation, and SOC reasoning. AutoPatch has substantial compute and storage requirements.
Visit CyberSecEval Free plan APILinuxSelf-hosted
LLM Guard brings a broad set of prompt and output scanners to a self-hosted toolkit with framework examples and API deployment. Its archived, unmaintained repository is a significant consideration for production use.
Visit LLM GuardThe facts
| CyberSecEval | LLM Guard | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Yes | Not published |
| Runs on | API, Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Web | API, Linux, Self-hosted |
| Lowest paid plan | Free or on request | Free or on request |
| Plans published | 1 | 1 |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | meta-llama.github.io | github.com |
| On llm security tools | #1 of 31 | #5 of 31 |
CyberSecEval: what it does well
- Tests prompt injection across text and visual attacks
- Checks insecure code suggestions in two settings
- Includes malware analysis and threat-intelligence benchmarks
- MIT license permits research and commercial use
What to know first
- AutoPatch requires Podman
- AutoPatch recommends at least 80 CPUs and 8 TB storage
- Apple Silicon MacBooks are not currently supported for AutoPatch
LLM Guard: what it does well
- Scanners cover prompts and model outputs.
- Examples include four LLM frameworks.
- Can run as an API.
- Custom scanners can be added.
- Free under the MIT License.
What to know first
- Requires Python 3.9 or higher.
- Repository is archived and read-only.
- No longer actively maintained.
Alternatives to CyberSecEval Alternatives to LLM Guard The whole list