We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and SonarQube 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."With the solution, we managed to obtain complete comprehensive visibility of the entire environment in the cloud, thus having better control of each of the resources."
"They offer free trials, which is quite appreciative and grabs more attention from new users and businesses."
"It helps us streamline our revenue streams, and we're spending less money on application security."
"It is a highly scalable solution with a quick turnaround time for deployment and running of the software across any IT system."
"The solution offers continuous security monitoring and alerting, which can help organizations detect and respond to security incidents in real time."
"The tool performs device health checkups and updates us. It helps us to be compliant with regulatory policies."
"Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI."
"The solution offers sophisticated security techniques with unique characteristics that can be particularly valuable for the financial sector, which is where we develop apps."
"The software quality gate streamlines the product's quality."
"Issue Explanations: Documentation with detailed samples. Helps in growing technical knowledge and re-writing logic to conforming solutions."
"SonarQube is useful for controlling all of our Azure task tracking and scanning."
"The reporting and the results are quick. It gets integrated within the pipeline well."
"The solution can verify vulnerabilities, code smells, and hotspots. It makes the software more secure and it helps make a junior or novice developer sharper."
"It provides the security that is required from a solution for financial businesses."
"It has very good scalability and stability."
"One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development. There are rules that define various technologies—Java, C#, Python, everything—and these rules declare the coding standards and code quality. With SonarQube, everything is detectable during the time of development and continuous integration, which is an advantage. SonarQube also has a Quality Gate, where the code should reach 85%. Below that, the code cannot be promoted to a further environment, it should be in a development environment only. So the checks are there, and SonarQube will provide that increase. It also provides suggestions on how the code can be fixed and methods of going about this, without allowing hackers to exploit the code. Another valuable feature is that it is tightly integrated with third-party tools. For example, we can see the SonarQube metrics in Bitbucket, the code repository. Once I raise the full request, the developer, team lead, or even the delivery lead can see the code quality metrics of the deliverable so that they can make a decision. SonarQube will also cover all of the top OWASP vulnerabilities, however it doesn't have penetration testing or hacker testing. We use other tools, like Checkmarx, to do penetration testing from the outside."
"We would like the solution to be more economical since it is not accessible to all clients."
"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."
"You need to know exactly the system. You cannot have someone running the system if they don't have the knowledge to do so."
"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."
"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."
"I do not know if it is already there, but I would like to have complete visibility between the posture management and firewall as a service."
"The exporting capabilities could be improved. Currently, exporting is fully dependent on the SonarQube environment."
"I find it is light on the security side."
"Code security scanning could be improved."
"Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version."
"The product must improve security analysis."
"Currently requires multiple tools, lacking one overall tool."
"We called support and complained but have not received any information as we use the free version. We had to fix it on our own and could not escalate it to the tool's developer."
"There could be better integration with other products."
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 12th in Application Security Tools with 28 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 108 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 8.8, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with Checkmarx One, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and Snyk. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. SonarQube 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.
