"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"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."
"One of the features they have is Software Composition Analysis. When organizations use third-party, open source libraries with their application development, because they're open source they quite often have a lot of bugs. There are always patches coming out for those open source applications. You really have to stay on your toes and keep up with any third-party libraries that might be integrated into your application. Veracode's Software Composition Analysis scans those libraries and we find that very valuable."
"The time savings has been tremendous. We saw ROI in the first six months."
"The source composition analysis component is great because it gives our developers some comfort in using new libraries."
"In terms of secure development, the SAST scan is very useful because we are able to identify security flaws in the code base itself, for the application."
"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."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"The UI is very intuitive and simple to use."
"It can integrate very well with DAST solutions. So both of them are combined into an integrated solution for customers running application security."
"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."
"The user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities. It's one of the key features they provide that's an excellent selling point. They're always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database."
"The most valuable features are the analysis and detection of issues within the application code."
"It helps our developers work more efficiently as we can identify things in a code prior to it being pushed to where it needs to go."
"SonarQube is good in terms of code review and to report on basic vulnerabilities in your applications."
"The most valuable feature of SonarQube I have found to be the configuration that has allowed us to can make adjusts to the demands of the code review. It gives a specified classification regarding the skill, prioritization, and it is easy for me to review and make my code."
"There is a free version."
"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."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"The fact that the solution does security scanning is valuable."
"The reports on offer are too verbose."
"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."
"Sometimes the scans are not done quickly, but the solutions that it provides are really good. The quality is high, but the analysis is not done extremely quickly."
"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."
"If Veracode was more diversified, as far as the number of platforms and the number of applications it could do in our favor, we would be using it even more. But there are a number of platforms it doesn't support. For example, I know they support C+, .NET, and Java, but there are certain platforms they don't support and that was disappointing."
"One feature I would like would be more selectivity in email alerts. While I like getting these, I would like to be able to be more granular in which ones I receive."
"The feature that allows me to read which mitigation answer was submitted, and to approve it, requires me to use do so in different screens. That makes it a little bit more complicated because I have to read and then I have to go back and make sure it falls under the same number ID number. That part is a little bit complicated from my perspective, because that's what I use the most."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"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."
"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"I would also like SonarQube to be able to write custom scanning rules. More documentation would be helpful as well because some of our guys were struggling with the customization script."
"One thing to improve would be the integration. There is a steep learning curve to get it integrated."
"The BPM language is important and should be considered in SonarQube."
"The time it took for me to do the whole process was approximately two hours because I had to download, read the documentation, and do the configurations."
"SonarQube could be improved with more dynamic testing—basically, now, it's a static code analysis scan. For example, when the developer writes the code and does the corresponding unit test, he can cover functional and non-functional. So the SonarQube could be improved by helping to execute unit tests and test dynamically, using various parameters, and to help detect any vulnerabilities. Currently, it'll just give the test case and say whether it passes or fails—it won't give you any other input or dynamic testing. They could use artificial intelligence to build a feature that would help developers identify and fix issues in the early stages, which would help us deliver the product and reduce costs. Another area with room for improvement is in regard to automating things, since the process currently needs to be done manually."
"Dynamic scanning is missing and there are some issues with security scanning."
"A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice."
"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."
Veracode covers all your Application Security needs in one solution through a combination of five analysis types; static analysis, dynamic analysis, software composition analysis, interactive application security testing, and penetration testing. Unlike on-premise solutions that are hard to scale and focused on finding rather than fixing, Veracode comprises a unique combination of SaaS technology and on-demand expertise that enables DevSecOps through integration with your pipeline, and empowers developers to find and fix security defects.
Checkmarx CxSAST is a highly accurate and flexible Static Code Analysis product that allows organizations to automatically scan un-compiled / un-built code and identify hundreds of security vulnerabilities in all major coding languages. CxSAST is available as a standalone product and can be effectively integrated into the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC) to streamline detection and remediation. CxSAST can be deployed on-premise in a private data center or hosted via a public cloud.
SonarQube is the leading tool for continuously inspecting Code Quality and Code Security, and guiding development teams during code reviews. SonarQube provides clear remediation guidance for 27 languages so developers can understand and fix issues, and so teams can deliver better and safer software. SonarQube integrates into your workflow to provide the right feedback at the right time: in-IDE with SonarLint, in pull requests, and in SonarQube itself. With over 225,000 deployments helping small development teams and global organizations, SonarQube provides the means for teams and companies around the world to own and impact their Code Quality and Code Security.
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 20 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security with 52 reviews. Checkmarx is rated 7.6, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Checkmarx writes "Easy interface that is user friendly, quick scanning, and good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Good integration and has useful feedback features, such as Quality Gate ". Checkmarx is most compared with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Snyk, Coverity, WhiteSource and Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Coverity, Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, WhiteSource and Snyk. See our Checkmarx vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security vendors.
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.