We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender, Klocwork, 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 product saves us cost and time."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"Klocwork's most valuable feature is the static code analysis feature. It detects the potential problem earlier to allow the developer to receive feedback quickly and then address it before it becomes a problem."
"The most valuable feature of Klocwork is finding defects while you're doing the coding. For example, if you have an IDE plug-in of Klocwork on Visual Studio or Eclipse, you can find the faults; similar to using spell check on Word, you can find out defects during the development phase, which means that you don't have to wait till the development is over to find the flaws and address the deficiencies. I also find language support in Klocwork good because it used to support only C, C++, C#, and Java, but now, it also supports Java scripts and Python."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"The most valuable feature is the Incremental analysis."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"The user interface is excellent, the code review process is quick and provides great analytics to understand our code better, and the SAST scan is high-speed."
"Veracode's cloud-based approach, coupled with the appliance that lets us use Veracode to scan internal-only web applications, has provided a seamless, always-up-to-date application security scanning solution."
"Veracode's technical support is great. They assigned us a TAM and once a week, we have a brief engagement with the TAM to verify that everything's going well. If we have any outstanding issues, they get serviced and addressed."
"With the pipeline scanner, it's easier for developers to scan their products, as they don't have to export anything from their computers. They can do everything with the command line on their computer."
"It has caught lots of flaws that could have been exploited, like SQL injection flaws. It has also improved developer engagement with information security."
"The Veracode technical support is very good. They are responsive and very knowledgeable."
"One thing we like is the secret detection feature. It has helped us to discover keys stored in our settings file as a TXT document. We can address that vulnerability by using encryption. We can even scan Docker images for vulnerabilities. Static analysis is another good feature of Veracode because we can run a security scan during development to identify the vulnerabilities."
"Within SCA, there is an extremely valuable feature called vulnerable methods. It is able to determine within a vulnerable library which methods are vulnerable. That is very valuable, because in the vast majority of cases where a library is vulnerable, none of the vulnerable methods are actually used by the code. So, if we want to prioritize the way open source libraries are updated when a library is found vulnerable, then we want to prioritize the libraries which have vulnerable methods used within the code."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"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."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
"Now the only issue we have is that whenever we need to get the code we have to build it first. Then we can get the report."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"Under NIST cybersecurity standards, we must address vulnerabilities within a specified time after discovering them. When we try to propagate those updates and fixes through the system, it would be nice if the clients could reconnect to the existing server or have the server dynamically updated in some way. I know that isn't easy, but maybe processes could be enhanced to make that more streamlined from a DevOps perspective."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"It could have better integration with our pipeline. If we could have better integration with our application pipeline, e.g., Jira, Bamboo, or Azure DevOps, then that will be very helpful. Right now, it is quite hard to integrate the solution into our existing pipeline."
"The user interface can sometimes be a little challenging to work with, and they seem to be changing their algorithm on what is an issue. I understand why they do it, but it sometimes causes more work on our end."
"The interface is basic and has room for improvement."
"Sometimes the scans are not done quickly, but the solutions that it provides are really good. The quality is high, but the analysis is not done extremely quickly."
"In the last month or so, I had a problem with the APIs when doing some implementations. The Veracode support team could be more specific and give me more examples. They shouldn't just copy the URL for a doc and send it to me."
"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."
"One of the most important areas that need improvement for Veracode is its DaaS. Veracode's DAST engines are primitive."
"When we engaged Veracode to conduct the manual penetration testing, they were extremely slow in completing the task and delivering the report, causing a delay of two to three weeks for us."
