We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender, Fortra Tripwire IP360, and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools.
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"It's become the pinnacle point for anything that enters the network or anything that's passing through to production to first be affected by IP360, hardened, and up to standard. For our integrity management, one was deployed in the bank about two years ago and that's still going to expand the usage and the product itself. That will go hand in hand with training and expanding the product as for where it's deployed."
"We could manage our entire IP range with the solution."
"Tripwire IP360 is a very stable solution."
"Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools."
"Tech support is outstanding. Best in class. Absolutely. They bend over backwards to help us. We'll come up with questions and within minutes, we'll get answers. It's amazing. It's truly amazing."
"The capability to identify vulnerable code is the most valuable feature of Veracode."
"I like the sandbox, the ability to upload compiled code, and how easy it is."
"It has an easy-to-use interface."
"It has the ability to statically scan your source code before it goes to production. It can be scanned within your testing or development environment, and that is very useful. And good explanations of all the vulnerabilities in your source code help take care of those issues in future code implementation as well."
"Veracode's most valuable aspect is continuous integration. It helps us integrate with other applications so that it can monitor the security process."
"The tech support has been very much on the forefront of contacting customers. They help us by making sure all the processes have been outlined and are being followed. They regularly look with us at the whole platform process."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"The reporting functions can use improvement. There is room for growth because reporting functions differ a lot depending on what you're going to output. It depends on whether it's for technical or senior management and how it's interpreted. There could be growth within the reporting functionality side."
"We need to dedicate time and resources to keep it running."
"I am not very impressed by the technical support."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"I would like Veracode to add more language support."
"Veracode is costly, and there is potential for improvement in its pricing."
"The static scans on Java lack microservices architecture scanning. We have developed an in-house pattern for this and the scans can't take care of it as a single entity."
"In some cases we use their APIs; they're not as rich as I would like."
"In the future, I would like to see the RASP capability built-in."
"The pricing for qualified startups such as Neo4j could be improved."
"The policies you have, where you can tune the findings you get, don't allow you not to file tickets about certain findings. It will always report the findings, even if you know you're not that concerned about a library writing to a system log, for example. It will keep raising them, even though you may have a ticket about it. The integration will keep updating the ticket every time the scan runs."
