CodeSonar vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing comparison

The compared CodeSecure and Black Duck solutions aren't in the same category. CodeSecure is ranked #30 in AS , and holds a 1.5% mindshare in the category. Black Duck is ranked #4 in FTT , and holds a 23.3% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,608 Views
1,800 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Read 4 Defensics Protocol Fuzzing reviews

1,067 Views
117 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and Defensics Protocol Fuzzing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Security Tools Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 868,759 peers since 2012

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

CodeSonar

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (30th), Static Code Analysis (10th)

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Fuzz Testing Tools (4th)

Mindshare comparison

CodeSonar and Defensics Protocol Fuzzing aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. CodeSonar is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.5%, up 1.1% compared to last year.
Defensics Protocol Fuzzing, on the other hand, focuses on Fuzz Testing Tools, holds 23.3% mindshare, up 19.3% since last year.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
CodeSonar	1.5%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)	20.5%
Checkmarx One	10.4%
Other	67.6%

Application Security Tools

Fuzz Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Defensics Protocol Fuzzing	23.3%
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional	31.5%
GitLab	22.6%
Other	22.599999999999994%

Fuzz Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

Sarath Kumar Choday

Senior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies

Product security tests for switches and router sections

Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install. What I see in the documentation isn't that. Even if something doesn't malfunction, sometimes it is hard to install and execute. The product needs video documentation. This would help a lot more.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

"It has been able to scale."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."

"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

Cons

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"It was expensive."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."

"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."

"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"Licensing is a bit expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

24%

University

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

No data available

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs CodeSonar

Compared 45% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 27% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 9% of the time

Axivion Static Code Analysis vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

Helix QAC vs CodeSonar

Compared 3% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 31% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 15% of the time

Veracode vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 14% of the time

Coverity Static vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 12% of the time

Ixia BreakingPoint vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 10% of the time

More Defensics Protocol Fuzzing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

September 2025

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing vs. GitLab

September 2025

Download Defensics Protocol Fuzzing product report

Also Known As

No data available

Codenomicon Defensics

Overview

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Defensics® fuzz testing is a comprehensive, powerful, and automated black box solution that enables organizations to effectively and efficiently discover and remediate security weaknesses in software. By taking a systematic and intelligent approach to negative testing, Defensics allows organizations to ensure software security without compromising on product innovation, increasing time to market, or inflating operational costs.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

September 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.