We performed a comparison between Fortify Static Code Analyzer and Klocwork based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Code Analysis solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We write software, and therefore, the most valuable aspect for us is basically the code analysis part."
"I like the Fortify taxonomy as it provides us with a list of all of the vulnerabilities found. Fortify release updated rule packs quarterly, with accompanying documentation, that lets us know what new features are being released."
"Integrating the Fortify Static Code Analyzer into our software development lifecycle was straightforward. It highlights important information beyond just syntax errors. It identifies issues like password credentials and access keys embedded in the code."
"Its flexibility is most valuable. It is such a flexible tool. It can be implemented in a number of ways. It can do anything you want it to do. It can be fully automated within a DevOps pipeline. It can also be used in an ad hoc, special test case scenario and anywhere in between."
"Automating the Jenkins plugins and the build title is a big plus."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer tells us if there are any security leaks or not. If there are, then it's notifying us and does not allow us to pass the DevOps pipeline. If it is finds everything's perfect, as per our given guidelines, then it is allowing us to go ahead and start it, and we are able to deploy it."
"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."
"It's helped us free up staff time."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"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."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"The tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time."
"The troubleshooting capabilities of this solution could be improved. This would reduce the number of cases that users have to submit."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer is a good solution, but sometimes we receive false positives. If they could reduce the number of false positives it would be good."
"It can be tricky if you want to exclude some files from scanning. For instance, if you do not want to scan and push testing files to Fortify Software Security Center, that is tricky with some IDEs, such as IntelliJ. We found that there is an Exclude feature that is not working. We reported that to them for future fixing. It needs some work on the plugins to make them consistent across IDEs and make them easier."
"It comes with a hefty licensing fee."
"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer has a bit of a learning curve, and I don't find it particularly helpful in narrowing down the vulnerabilities we should prioritize."
"The product shows false positives for Python applications."
"The generation of false positives should be reduced."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."
"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."
"We bought Klocwork, but it was limited to one little program, but the program is now sort of failing. So, we have a license for usage on a program that is sort of failing, and we really can't use the license on anything else."
"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
Fortify Static Code Analyzer is ranked 3rd in Static Code Analysis with 13 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 4th in Static Code Analysis with 20 reviews. Fortify Static Code Analyzer is rated 8.4, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify Static Code Analyzer writes "Seamless to integrate and identify vulnerabilities and frees up staff time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Fortify Static Code Analyzer is most compared with Black Duck, Snyk, Veracode, Sonatype Lifecycle and GitLab, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and Checkmarx One. See our Fortify Static Code Analyzer vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Static Code Analysis vendors.
We monitor all Static Code Analysis 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.
