No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco SecureX [EOL] vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco SecureX [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Veracode
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Container Security (12th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (1st), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

Alon K - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO & VP of Cyber Solutions, Israel at Rockwell Automation
Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore
One of the examples is related to forensics. The forensics are amazing because when you have enrichment, and the solutions talk with each other, when you need it, you have the ability to know everything in the organization: when, why, whatever. With just one click you have information from email, from the endpoint, from the web. Let's say that tomorrow morning, you have a ransom[ware] attack in your organization and you would like to know from which email it came, or where the customer saved the file, even though the incident didn't occur at the same moment. With SecureX, you have Cisco Threat Response inside. [With] one click, you get all of the flow. That's amazing value. That also releases resources for our customers. The customers don't have to connect many systems and try to register the event on each system, or to go to the SIEM and do a correlation. That's the one-stop shop for the customers, and that's amazing.
reviewer2753535 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevSecOps Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Integrates security into the development process and improves team collaboration
Veracode helps organizations develop software by reducing the risk of security vulnerabilities through developer enablement and applications focused on governance. You can utilize different levels of processes to achieve better performance or a more scalable service. Since I started working with it in 2022, I’ve found it to be cost-effective as well. Overall, Veracode is a user-friendly security tool. It includes features such as Static Application Security Testing (SAST), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), and Software Composition Analysis (SCA). During the development phase, we can identify vulnerabilities in the application. This process occurs in the staging environment during development. When we're ready to go to production, we conduct a final check. Essentially, this tool helps identify vulnerabilities during the code development stage, including both high-level vulnerabilities and those related to open-source software composition. We utilize specific methodologies for this purpose. Additionally, it offers a feature that allows us to set up policies based on client requirements. This means we can customize the tool to meet the specific needs of our clients, ensuring that they receive the appropriate level of security in their applications. Veracode is user-friendly as well. Compared to other tools, their scans take 15 minutes or under. If you have a large scale of libraries or data, it might take longer, but based on my personal experience, the scan usually runs within fifteen minutes. For my case study using the Veracode tool, I worked on an internal project following industry standards. We used Veracode to improve our security posture and speed up the time to market by streamlining the development process. This enhanced collaboration between developers, operations, and security teams. The automated scanning process helped identify and fix vulnerabilities earlier in the development process. We maintained compliance with regulatory requirements, avoided fines, and built customer trust by integrating security into the development process. When we conduct this scan, we receive data on a list of vulnerabilities. This information improved our communication and increased transparency, which leads to better reports about the efforts being put in. This results in a more effective and efficient collaboration process, making it user-friendly for all involved. When considering costs, if we resort to manual processes, it can be time-consuming. Therefore, we utilize automated scans to identify and fix security issues. This allows us to address vulnerabilities early in the development process, as we discussed previously. This applies both to our in-house code and third-party libraries, using Software Composition Analysis (SCA) agent-based scans. In the future, we will also implement SCA agent-based scans as a separate feature within Veracode, which can help organizations avoid the expensive and time-consuming consequences of security issues. Furthermore, we have seen an increase in compliance, helping to maintain adherence to regulatory requirements and industry standards, thereby avoiding fines and reputational damage associated with noncompliance. Additionally, by integrating security into the development process, we enhance customer trust in our organization and its products.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The SecureX solution has the best impact for the customer because it has all the visibility of my applications and my users' applications."
"Integrates well with our existing security infrastructure."
"SecureX definitely provides us with contextual awareness throughout our security ecosystem, since it allows us to integrate multiple threat intelligence feeds, as well as multiple security appliances and platforms."
"This solution definitely helps us meet our cyber security goals and we haven't had any problems so far."
"Its cybersecurity and resilience have been extremely important for our organization."
"I like that I don't have to jump around to five different products and log into five different places to view the data that it returns."
"The most beneficial feature of Cisco SecureX for cybersecurity efforts is its integration with other Cisco solutions and the environment. This sets it apart, as its APIs and overall integration capabilities are very strong. Additionally, its detection capabilities are commendable."
"Using SecureX, we can aggregate the data from all our security products, automate many of our tasks that we had to do manually before, save a huge amount of time, and provide many reports about usage of our systems and networks to our leaders and managers to show what we can do to make our security better."
"The time savings has been tremendous. We saw ROI in the first six months."
"Using an automated tool brings cost reduction and more security."
"From the very relevant results and issues that were pinpointed by Veracode, I can say that our customer security was greatly enhanced by its use."
"Overall, I think that if it's implemented correctly for the business, Veracode is highly effective in preventing vulnerable code from going into production."
"It's not "one policy fits all." I really like that Veracode allows me to set up specific policies that I can apply to applications."
"I don't have to have a team of developers behind me that keep up with all the latest threats because the subscription service they provide for me does that."
"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 most valuable feature is Veracode SDP, which allows for something related to third-party vulnerabilities. When we build a product, we use a lot of third-party libraries instead of building everything from scratch. We just use a library which is already been built; we just use that component in our product. Sometimes, these libraries may have bugs or issues, and it's hard to keep track of them because we use thousands of them."
 

Cons

"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"If they could make the Cisco Umbrella piece a little bit more advanced or easier to manage, that would help. We use it for filtering and when you compare it to a normal content filter, it lacks some functionality."
"It is good that it provides information. However, I think that there needs to be more actionable items for us based on the information provided."
"They could expand into more areas."
"The automation and orchestration could be simpler. It could be that all the other parts are that easy to use so that these stick out as a negative, but that's the trickiest part for us. The workflows within the orchestration are just a bit more difficult."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
"I'm not sure that I would call it a bug, but sometimes the solution is a little slow."
"It would help to have more training for developers to help them set it up."
"It can have more APIs and capabilities to handle other things well. We were doing a trial for it. There were two things that I looked at: one was uploading some Java-related content and the other was uploading database SQL files and having the review done on the quarterback. The Java portion of it worked fine, and it was pretty seamless, but the database portion was not. We uploaded some files to use for vulnerabilities, and the tell-all portion of it was pretty easy. We uploaded a war file and Java files, and we got the reports back on these. They were pretty clear to understand. We did the same thing for the database portion for the most part. However, the content wasn't getting uploaded in a predictable fashion, and it was slow and hard to get done. We had to do it over and over. After it indicated that the content was uploaded, there were no results. There were zero search findings. It was possibly a user error, something that we didn't do correctly, but they had acknowledged that it was something they were currently enhancing. This is something that could be made easier if they haven't already done that. I don't know how many releases they've had in that timeframe. I haven't looked at it since then. It was a trial period."
"They need to have a plug-in, a better integration with the development environment."
"Veracode has areas for improvement in that the scan takes some time for each Jar depending on the size."
"Veracode should provide more flexibility in its pricing and licensing modules so that it could be more affordable for all types of projects and not only for very active mission-critical projects."
"Straightforward to set up, but the configuration of the rules engine is difficult and complicated."
"The sandbox could use some improvement; when creating a sandbox, it requires us to put the application name in twice, which seems unnecessary."
"I would like to see these features: entering comments for internal tracking; entering a priority; reports that show the above."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is the best part of this solution. It is free if you buy Umbrella or Duo Security. It is also a good solution."
"You can spend less money for another solution, but if you really want to have a good solution you have to pay. We are happy that we are getting such a good solution for what we are spending."
"It comes free with all Cisco products. So, it is a good price."
"Cisco SecureX is more expensive than Trend Micro. However, considering the integration capabilities with other solutions and the quality of technical support, I believe there's justification for the price difference."
"For the value you get, the pricing of the solution is excellent."
"It would be nice if they had a different pricing model. Most of our budget for projects goes towards Cisco."
"The pricing is competitive, especially for education institutions. Licensing can be a little bit difficult to navigate, especially with resellers with Cisco, but for us it has been pretty easy."
"It is free. It can't get any better than that."
"The pricing is pretty high."
"The cost of scanning code is cheaper. It's typically $0.50 per line of code. However, it's expensive to run a high-level process that would normally require a human security expert. For example, penetration testing costs about $1,000 per application for penetration testing. The cost of these features may be too high for smaller organizations. On the other hand, Veracode's interactive application security testing is fast and cheaper compared to other software."
"The Veracode price model is based on application profiles, which is how you package your components for scanning."
"The pricing is fair."
"It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool."
"It can be expensive to do this, so I would just make sure that you're getting the proper number of licenses. Do your analysis. Make sure you know exactly what it is you need, going in."
"The solution is expensive."
"Get a license at the beginning of a project. Don't wait until the end, because you want to use the product throughout the entire software development lifecycle, not just at the end. You could be surprised, and not in a positive way, with all the vulnerabilities there are in your code."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
903,257 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise46
Large Enterprise114
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
What is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode Static Analysis?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Veracode is that it is fairly moderate.
 

Also Known As

Kenna.AppSec, Kenna.VI
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

NHS, Rackspace, UNC Pembroke, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Missing Piece
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: June 2026.
903,257 professionals have used our research since 2012.