We performed a comparison between Coverity and Spirent CyberFlood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"One of the most valuable features is Contributing Events. That particular feature helps the developer understand the root cause of a defect. So you can locate the starting point of the defect and figure out exactly how it is being exploited."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."
"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."
"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 33 reviews while Spirent CyberFlood is ranked 26th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 4 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Spirent CyberFlood is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spirent CyberFlood writes "I like the solution's flexibility". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Veracode, whereas Spirent CyberFlood is most compared with Ixia BreakingPoint and Ixia BreakingPoint VE. See our Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
