We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and GitHub Advanced Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"Less false positive errors as compared to any other solution."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that its number of false positives is less than the other security application platforms. Its ease of use is another good feature. It also supports most of the languages."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx is the user interface, it is very easy to use. We do not need to configure anything, we only have to scan to see the results."
"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need."
"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"The interactive application security testing, or IAST, the interactive part where you're looking at an application that lives in a runtime environment on a server or virtual machine, needs improvement."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"The report limitations are the main issue."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."
"There could be DST features included in the product."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while GitHub Advanced Security is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 6 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while GitHub Advanced Security is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub Advanced Security writes "A tool that provides ease of integration with the set of existing codes in an infrastructure". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas GitHub Advanced Security is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode, Fortify on Demand and GitLab. See our Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Advanced Security report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
