We performed a comparison between Contrast Security Assess and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."
"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."
"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."
"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."
"You can easily integrate it with Azure DevOps. This is an added value because we work with Azure DevOps. Veracode is natively supported and we don't have to work with APIs."
"The time savings has been tremendous. We saw ROI in the first six months."
"It is SaaS hosted. That makes it very convenient to use. There is no initial time needed to set up an application. Scanning is a matter of minutes. You just log in, create an application profile, associate a security configuration, and that's about it. It takes 10 minutes to start. The lack of initial lead time or initial overhead to get going is the primary advantage."
"The dynamic scanning tool is what I like the best. Compared to other tools that I've used for dynamic scanning, it's much faster and easier to use."
"Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers."
"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."
"The visibility into application status helps reduce risk exposure for our software. Today, any findings provided by the DAST are reviewed by the developers and we have internal processes in place to correct those findings before there can be a release. So it absolutely does prevent us from releasing weak code."
"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."
"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."
"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."
"The UI could be better. Also, there are some scenarios where there is no security flaw, but the report indicates that there is a security flaw. The report is not perfectly accurate. So, the accuracy of the scanning reports needs improvement."
"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 reports on offer are too verbose."
"I would like to see them provide more content in the developer training section. This field is really changing each day and there are flaws that are detected each day. Some sort of regular updates to the learning would help."
"When it comes to the speed of the pipeline scan, one of the things we have found with Veracode is that it's very fast with Java-based applications but a bit slow with C/C++ based applications. So we have implemented the pipeline scan only for Java-based applications not for the C/C++ applications."
"Scheduling can be a little difficult. For instance, if you set up recurring scheduled scans and a developer comes in and says, "Hey, I have this critical release that happened outside of our normal release patterns and they want you to scan it," we actually have to change our schedule configuration and that means we lose the recurring scheduling settings we had."
"I've seen slightly better static analysis tools from other companies when it comes to speed and ease of use."
"Third-party library scanning would be very useful to have. When I was researching this a year ago, there was not a third-party library scan available. This would be a nice feature to have because we are now running through some assessments and finding out which tool can do it since this information needs to be captured. Since Veracode is a security solution, this should be related."
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
Contrast Security Assess is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 3 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. Contrast Security Assess is rated 8.6, while Veracode is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Contrast Security Assess writes "We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Good reporting, comprehensive interface, and integrates well into our build pipeline". Contrast Security Assess is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Fortify WebInspect, HCL AppScan and OWASP Zap, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Coverity and OWASP Zap. See our Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
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.
