# Practical Comparison Between the CI/CD Platforms Azure DevOps and GitHub
## 5 Security Aspects
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Category** & **Subcategory** & **Azure DevOps** & **GitHub** & **Remarks** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Use Case Fit} & \multirow{2}{*}{Enterprise-Scale Projects} & Excellent for large-scale, multi-stage deployments & Less efficient for large-scale, complex projects & Azure DevOps is better for enterprise-scale needs. \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Small to Medium Teams} & \multirow{2}{*}{Overall for small teams} & Ideal for agile, small to medium-sized teams & GitHub is more suitable for smaller, agile teams. \\ \cline{3-5}  & & Not optimized for open-source workflows & Excellent for open-source and Git-native workflows & GitHub is the preferred choice for open-source projects. \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Infrastructure} & \multirow{2}{*}{Hosting Options} & Microsoft-hosted and self-hosted agents & GitHub-hosted and self-hosted runners & Both offer flexibility, but Azure DevOps provides more \\ \cline{3-5}  & & & & DevOps provides more \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Advanced Features} & \multirow{2}{*}{Pipeline Isolation} & Windows, Linux, macOS & Windows, Linux, macOS & Both platforms support multiple operating systems. \\ \cline{3-5}  & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-5}  & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-5}  & & & & \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-5}  & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Workflow Approval} & Release approvals, & Workflow approval processes & Azure DevOps provides stricter \\ \cline{1-1}  & & & & workflow controls. \\ \hline \multirow{5}{*}{Threat Detection} & Microsoft Defender for & GitHub Advanced Security & Both offer strong security, but \\ \cline{1-1}  & DevOps, anomaly detection & (code scanning, secret scanning) & Azure DevOps integrates better \\ \cline{1-1} \cline{3-5}  & & & & with enterprise tools. \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._One key difference is that GitHub repositories are, by default, publicly accessible unless explicitly marked as private, whereas Azure DevOps enforces stricter repository access controls from the outset. While GitHub Enterprise Server allows organizations to host self-contained private repositories, Azure DevOps Server provides more comprehensive access control mechanisms, including integrating on-premises IAM solutions. Repository management and branch protection are crucial security concerns in software development, as improperly configured repositories can lead to unauthorized code changes, accidental overwrites, or malicious commits. Azure DevOps and GitHub offer branch protection rules, mandatory code reviews, and commit signing, but their implementation differs in complexity and enforcement capabilities [29]. Azure DevOps offers branch security policies that prevent unauthorized direct commits to protected branches, ensuring that every change undergoes review, validation, and approval before being integrated. Organizations can enforce gated check-ins, requiring developers to run automated build tests before merging code. Additionally, Azure DevOps enables branch locking, explicit permission settings per branch, and hierarchical repository security policies, providing enterprises with greater control over who can modify critical parts of the codebase. GitHub implements protected branches and requires reviewers to approve pull requests before they can be merged into the main branch. It also includes draft pull requests, which allow developers to share code changes in progress without allowing them to be merged. A significant security advantage of GitHub is its integration with GitHub Actions for security enforcement, where teams can automate security checks, code linting, and compliance scans directly within pull requests. One unique feature in GitHub is committed signature verification, which enables organizations to require signed commits using GPG encryption keys or SSH keys, preventing spoofed commits and unauthorized changes.