"The most valuable features are that you can do static analysis and dynamic analysis on a scheduled basis and that you can push the findings into JIRA."
"Veracode provides guidance for fixing vulnerabilities. It enables developers to write secure code from the start by pointing them to the problematic line of code, and saying, "This function/method has security vulnerabilities," then suggests alternatives to fix it. Then, we adopt their suggestions of the tool. By implementing it in the right way, we can fix the issue. For example, if the tool has found a method where it copied one piece of memory into another piece of memory in the code. The tool points to problematic methods with the vulnerability and provides ways to code it more securely. By adopting their suggestions, we are fixing this vulnerability."
"The Veracode technical support is very good. They are responsive and very knowledgeable."
"The solution's ability to prevent vulnerable code from going into production is perfectly fine. It delivers, at least for the reports that we have been checking on Java and JavaScript. It has reported things that were helpful."
"It is easy to use for us developers. It supports so many languages: C#, .NET Core, .NET Framework, and it even scans some of our JavaScript. You just need the extension to upload the files and the reports are generated with so much detail."
"The time savings has been tremendous. We saw ROI in the first six months."
"There is a single area on the dashboard where you can get a full view of all of the tests and the results from everything. There is a nice, very simple graphic that shows you the types of vulnerabilities that were found, their severity, the scoring, and in what part of the code they were found. All the details are together in one place."
"Veracode's technical support is great. They assigned us a TAM and once a week, we have a brief engagement with the TAM to verify that everything's going well. If we have any outstanding issues, they get serviced and addressed."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"I like that you don't have to compile the code in order to execute static code analysis. So, it's very handy."
"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 user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I think if they could improve the operations around accepted vulnerabilities, we would see improvements in our productivity."
"The policies you have, where you can tune the findings you get, don't allow you not to file tickets about certain findings. It will always report the findings, even if you know you're not that concerned about a library writing to a system log, for example. It will keep raising them, even though you may have a ticket about it. The integration will keep updating the ticket every time the scan runs."
"I would ask Veracode to be a lot more engaged with the customer and set up live sessions where they force the customer to engage with Veracode's technical team. Veracode could show them a repo, how they should do things, this is what these results mean, here is a dashboard, here's the interpretation, here's where you find the results."
"The static analysis is prone to a lot of false positives. But that's how it is with most static analysis tools... Also, the static analysis can sometimes take a little while. The time that it takes to do a scan should be improved."
"The ideal situation in terms of putting the results in front of the developers would be with Veracode integration into the developer environment (IDE). They do have a plugin, which we've used in the past, but we were not as positive about it."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"There is much to be desired of UI and user experience. The UI is very slow. With every click, it just takes a lot of time for the pages to load. We have seen this consistently since getting this solution. The UI and UX are very disjointed."
"Veracode has plenty of data. The problem is the information on the dashboards of Veracode, as the user interface is not great. It's not immediately usable. Most of the time, the best way to use it is to just create issues and put them in JIRA... But if I were a startup, and only had products with a good user interface, I wouldn't use Veracode because the UI is very dated."
"The pricing can get a bit expensive, depending on the company's size."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code. The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"The scanner could be better."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
Checkmarx is ranked 5th in Application Security with 24 reviews while Fortify WebInspect is ranked 1st in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 5 reviews. Checkmarx is rated 7.6, while Fortify WebInspect is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of Checkmarx writes "No need to compile the code to execute static code analysis, but should be more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify WebInspect writes "Good reporting and vulnerability management, but needs better performance and resource utilization". Checkmarx is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Snyk, Coverity and Fortify Application Defender, whereas Fortify WebInspect is most compared with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, OWASP Zap, HCL AppScan and Contrast Security Assess. See our Checkmarx vs. Fortify WebInspect report.
We monitor all Application Security 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.
