We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and SonarCloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very fast."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"The feature that I find the most useful is being able to just see the vulnerabilities online while checking the code and then checking suggestions for fixing them."
"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."
"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to submit your code and have it run in the background. Then, if something comes up that is more specific, you have the security analyst who can jump in and help, if needed."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"The reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"In terms of communication, they can integrate a few more third-party tools. It would be great if we can have more options for microservice communication. They can also improve the securability a bit more because security is one of the biggest aspects these days when you are using the cloud. Some more security features would be really helpful."
"There's a bit of a learning curve. Our development team is struggling with following the rules and following the new processes."
"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."
"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 9th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 57 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and GitHub Code Scanning. See our Fortify on Demand vs. SonarCloud report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
