Checkmarx One vs Sysdig Secure comparison

"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."

"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."

"The most valuable feature is the application tracking reporting."

"The UI is user-friendly."

"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are its integration with multiple SCM solutions and CICD tools, its ability to scale according to user licenses, and the quick scanning process."

"We use the solution for dynamic application testing."

"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."

"It is a stable product."

"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."

"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."

"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."

"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."

"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."

"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."

"I have not seen any stability issues so far."

"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."

"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."

"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."

"We can run only one project at a time."

"I can't create a business case with multiple-factor authentication."

"Its user interface could be improved and made more friendly."

"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."

"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."

"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."

"Reporting can definitely be better. Live dashboards should be configurable for a longer period of time rather than 30 days. Being able to go back in time to compare six months ago to today would be valuable."

"Sysdig Secure needs to scale more for complete cloud-native coverage."

"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."

"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."

"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."

"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."

"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."

"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."

"Be cautious of the one-year subscription date. Once it expires, your price will go up."

"It is an expensive solution."

"If you want more, you have to pay more. You have to pay for additional modules or functionalities."

"The pricing was not very good. This is just a framework which shouldn’t cost so much."

"I would rate the solution’s pricing an eight out of ten. The tool’s pricing is higher than others and it is for the license alone."

"Before implementing the product I would evaluate if it is really necessary to scan so many different languages and frameworks. If not, I think there must be a cheaper solution for scanning Java-only applications (which are 90% of our applications)."

"We have purchased an annual license to use this solution. The price is reasonable."

"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."

"I am always going to say that it could be a little bit cheaper. I do feel that it is a little bit on the expensive side."

"In comparison to other cloud solutions, it's reasonably priced. However, when compared to in-house built open-source projects, it might be considered somewhat costly. The cost depends on whether someone sees the support provided by Sysdig as an advantage or if it's deemed unnecessary. Personally, I find the support to be excellent and consider it a good value."

"It is quite costly compared to other tools."

"The solution's pricing depends on the agents...In short, the price depends on the environment of its user."

"Sysdig is competitive. The quality matches the pricing. Obviously, everyone wants things to be cheaper, but if you're realistic, you acknowledge that quality service comes with a price. Sysdig is the gold standard for Kubernetes, and I wouldn't choose anything else. We live in Kubernetes. Everything is containerized, so that means a lot to us, and we're willing to make an investment."