We performed a comparison between Cisco SecureX and Coverity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."It has evolved a lot, just that monitoring piece to the current Orchestrator piece. The additional analytics are there. They now have something called Insight, which can basically take data from Microsoft Azure AD and Intune to give us information about our endpoints. This is detailed information about the endpoints, from Secure Endpoint and all these different products. So, it is just constantly evolving. Every time that it evolves, we have more information with more visibility. There are more features that we have that just make everything so much easier, and it is in one place. I don't have to keep going back and forth. I don't have to go to Secure Endpoint and ISE to get the data. I don't have to go to Intune on Microsoft to get the information. It is all in one place."
"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 automation and orchestration tools are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to manage all the applications and visibility. For example, if there is malware, spam, or another component that wants to attack the company in my servers, network, or applications, then SecureX will react to the problem."
"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."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"The ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"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."
"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."
"The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."
"The product is easy to use."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"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."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"The playbooks provided with the product are great, although I would appreciate having more playbooks available. Threats are constantly evolving, so having access to updated playbooks is crucial."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"what's missing right now is the multi-tenant capability."
"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."
"Coverity is not stable."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"We actually specified several checkers, but we found some checkers had a higher false positive rate. I think this is a problem. Because we have to waste some time is really the issue because the issue is not an issue. I mean, the tool pauses or an issue, but the same issue is the filter now.Some check checkers cannot find some issues, but sometimes they find issues that are not relevant, right, that are not really issues. Some customisation mechanism can be added in the next release so that we can define our Checker. The Modelling feature provided by Coverity helps in finding more information for potential issues but it is not mature enough, it should be mature. The fast testing feature for security testing campaign can be added as well. So if you correctly integrate it with the training team, maybe you can help us to find more potential issues."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
Cisco SecureX is ranked 18th in Application Security Tools with 13 reviews while Coverity is ranked 4th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 33 reviews. Cisco SecureX is rated 9.0, while Coverity is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco SecureX writes "Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". Cisco SecureX is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Trend Vision One, Splunk SOAR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Veracode.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
