We performed a comparison between ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It stands out for its intuitive and efficient user interface, robust detection capabilities with minimal false positives, and the ability to handle encrypted traffic, making it a valuable asset for network security and management."
"It is very easy to collect and handle data in ExtraHop Reveal(X) Cloud. Integration with Big Data is also easy. Many of our customers integrate it with Big Data platforms like Splunk or Elastic. It is also easy to handle and easy to understand."
"It is scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the static scan that checks for security issues."
"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 capability to identify vulnerable code is the most valuable feature of Veracode."
"The most valuable feature is the efficiency of the tool in finding vulnerabilities."
"For our rapid, secure DevOps cycle, we have integration of the Vericode API into our build tool, and Greenlight into our IDE."
"The source composition analysis component is great because it gives our developers some comfort in using new libraries."
"Provides the capability to track remediation and the handling of identified vulnerabilities."
"The solution's ability to prevent vulnerable code from going into production is perfectly fine. It delivers, at least for the reports that we have been checking on Java and JavaScript. It has reported things that were helpful."
"They can include integration with SAP. Currently, no vendor provides network performance monitoring in the SAP market. It is a very big market. We have around 400 customers for SAP in Korea. In the USA, there are more than 10,000 customers."
"A drawback includes bucket storage limitations for payload data, necessitating timely extraction for thorough investigations."
"There needs to be more support."
"The scanning is a little slow, but other than that it's fine. It's usually when the binaries get up into the multi-hundred megabyte size."
"There needs to be better API integration to the development team's pipeline, which is something that is missing and needs to be improved."
"Veracode Static Analysis can improve the false positive. There are always improvements that can be done to the false positive rate. There are some things that get flagged that are not an issue. However, it is not a huge concern."
"To be able to upload source codes without being compiled. That’s one feature that drives us to see other sources."
"I do expect large applications with millions of lines of code to take a while, but it would be nice if there was a possibility to be able to have a baseline initial scan. I know that Veracode touts that there are Pipeline Scans that are supposed to take 90 seconds or less, and we've tried to do that ourselves with our ERP application. However, it actually times out after two hours of scanning. If the static scan itself or another option to run a lower tier scan can be integrated earlier on into our SDLC, it would be great. Right now, it takes so long that we usually leave it till a bit later in the cycle, whereas if it ran faster, we could push it to the time when a developer will be checking in code. That would make us feel a lot more confident that we'd be able to catch things almost instantaneously."
"We have approximately 900 people using the solution. The solution is scalable, but there is a high cost attached to it."
"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."
"The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report."
ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is ranked 26th in Container Security with 3 reviews while Veracode is ranked 4th in Container Security with 194 reviews. ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is rated 8.6, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 writes "A competitive choice for network detection and response with exceptional user interface, ease of implementation and minimal false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 is most compared with ExtraHop Reveal(x), Forescout Platform and Corelight, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and OWASP Zap. See our ExtraHop Reveal(x) 360 vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.
