We performed a comparison between Contrast Security Protect and Mend.io 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."The solution has excellent real-time capabilities."
"The product gives a few false positives. We get 99 percent true positives."
"Protect provides us with more in-depth visibility into ongoing attacks."
"The reporting capability gives us the option to generate an open-source license report in a single click, which gets all copyright and license information, including dependencies."
"It gives us full visibility into what we're using, what needs to be updated, and what's vulnerable, which helps us make better decisions."
"The vulnerability analysis is the best aspect of the solution."
"Attribution and license due diligence reports help us with aggregating the necessary data that we, in turn, have to provide to satisfy the various licenses copyright and component usage disclosures in our software."
"The solution is scalable."
"For us, the most valuable tool was open-source licensing analysis."
"Its ease of use and good results are the most valuable."
"We set the solution up and enabled it and we had everything running pretty quickly."
"There's room for improvement in the initial setup."
"Contrast Security Protect needs to improve integration."
"Protect's reporting GUI is very basic. To get all statuses from the APIs, we needed to write our own KPI dashboard to provide reports."
"The UI can be slow once in a while, and we're not sure if it's because of the amount of data we have, or it is just a slow product, but it would be nice if it could be improved."
"WhiteSource only produces a report, which is nice to look at. However, you have to check that report every week, to see if something was found that you don't want. It would be great if the build that's generating a report would fail if it finds a very important vulnerability, for instance."
"It would be good if it can do dynamic code analysis. It is not necessarily in that space, but it can do more because we have too many tools. Their partner relationship support is a little bit confusing. They haven't really streamlined the support process when we buy through a reseller. They should improve their process."
"WhiteSource needs improvement in the scanning of the containers and images with distinguishing the layers."
"Some detected libraries do not specify a location of where in the source they were matched from, which is something that should be enhanced to enable quicker troubleshooting."
"The only thing that I don't find support for on Mend Prioritize is C++."
"On the reporting side, they could make some improvements. They are making the reports better and better, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to generate a report for our entire organization."
"They're working on a UI refresh. That's probably been one of the pain points for us as it feels like a really old application."
Contrast Security Protect is ranked 32nd in Application Security Tools with 3 reviews while Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews. Contrast Security Protect is rated 8.4, while Mend.io is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Contrast Security Protect writes "It provides us with more in-depth visibility into ongoing attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". Contrast Security Protect is most compared with SonarQube, Fortify on Demand, Snyk, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning and Sonatype Lifecycle, whereas Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Snyk, Checkmarx One and Veracode. See our Contrast Security Protect vs. Mend.io report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.