We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and ImmuniWeb based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"Less false positive errors as compared to any other solution."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the Best Fix Location and the Payments option because you can save a lot of time trying to mitigate the configuration. Using these tools can save you a lot of time."
"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"It is a stable product."
"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"The UI is user-friendly."
"ImmuniWeb is stable."
"The initial setup process is user-friendly."
"I like the fully automated continuous discovery run by ImmuniWeb in the background. We do not need to rerun the same tests or the same scanning against our resources. We need to supply our IP addresses, domain names, and significant resources with special domain names and URLs, and we need to do it only once. Then we always have an up-to-date picture. I also like the integration with our single sign-on system. We do not need to maintain a separate set of usernames or user accounts. We can plug this ImmuniWeb service into our authentication technology, enabling two-factor authentication. We have secure authentication right out of the box. The other important feature I like is the executive view. You can easily switch from a technical view to an executive view and have a helicopter view of the compliance status. We can see how much effort is required and our current status."
"ImmuniWeb boasts a robust vulnerability detection mechanism, formidable threat mitigation, and an efficient remediation process, incorporating automation techniques and ALM strategies. The solution is highly stable. The solution is scalable. Editing Key Points for Review "Review about ImmuniWeb" What is our primary use case? We use the solution when we face challenges and urgent attention is needed for complex cases from our clients. To address this, we collaborate with the middleware, internal, and client teams to analyze and sort through intricate logs concerning our business cybersecurity program. How has it helped my organization? The solution helped us with one of our clients in the New York area contacted us about a data breach. In response, we swiftly organized a case meeting involving our client, internal, and email customer support teams. Together, we conducted an incident response, facilitating offline assistance for proper planning and risk management processes. We delved into the details of the data breach, identified how it occurred, and collaborated to rectify the issue. The client expressed satisfaction with the resolution process. What is most valuable? ImmuniWeb boasts a robust vulnerability detection mechanism, formidable threat mitigation, and an efficient remediation process, incorporating automation techniques and ALM strategies. It also focuses on consumer satisfaction and operates in English-speaking markets, primarily required by the UAE, the United States, Canada, and Australia, among other developed countries. For how long have I used the solution? We have been using this product for the past one and half years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The solution is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution is scalable. I rate it a nine out of ten. How are customer service and support? Support is generally excellent"
"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"After the assessment, you clearly know which assets require penetration testing."
"The most valuable features are the SLA of Zero false-positives, less time of service development, validation of unlimited patched vulnerabilities, and several others."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"The product can be improved by continuing to expand the application languages and frameworks that can be scanned for vulnerabilities. This includes expanded coverage for mobile applications as well as open-source development tools."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"A great idea would be to make a mobile application for the ImmuniWeb portal so that all information would be available on the go and from a mobile phone as well. It would be much more convenient."
"The deployment process on the cloud is straightforward, while on-premise can be complex. Support is generally excellent, although there can be delays in ticket resolution."
"It would be better if they had an automated tagging feature. The tagging functionality currently requires manual tagging, and that's probably the most needed feature from my standpoint. We also do not have enough tools, enough features, or options to display different resources in the way we need. There are basic grouping and some filtering features, but we still cannot fully separate some flavors of our resources. However, we may not be aware of the latest features."
"ImmuniWeb sometimes shows previous scans instead of running tests."
"A great idea would be to support using Discovery on the internal network, allowing delivery of all the features of the current Discovery to internal network resources."
"Its technical support could be better."
"The product’s interface for the web applications could be similar to Android and iOS versions."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Testing (AST) with 67 reviews while ImmuniWeb is ranked 17th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 7 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while ImmuniWeb is rated 8.2. 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 ImmuniWeb writes "Easy initial setup process, but reporting feature for web scanning tools need improvement". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas ImmuniWeb is most compared with Qualys Web Application Scanning, Acunetix, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, OWASP Zap and Veracode. See our Checkmarx One vs. ImmuniWeb report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
