"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."
"Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers."
"The policy reporting for ensuring compliance with industry standards and regulations is pretty comprehensive, especially around PCI. If you do the static analysis, the dynamic analysis, and then a manual penetration test, it aggregates all of these results into one report. And then they create a PCI-specific report around it which helps to illustrate how the application adheres to different standards."
"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"In terms of secure development, the SAST scan is very useful because we are able to identify security flaws in the code base itself, for the application."
"The visibility into application status helps reduce risk exposure for our software. Today, any findings provided by the DAST are reviewed by the developers and we have internal processes in place to correct those findings before there can be a release. So it absolutely does prevent us from releasing weak code."
"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 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."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."
"AppScan is stable."
"It was easy to set up."
"The HCL AppScan turnaround time for Burp Suite or any new feature request is pretty good, and that is why we are sticking with the HCL."
"It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
"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 feature that allows me to read which mitigation answer was submitted, and to approve it, requires me to use do so in different screens. That makes it a little bit more complicated because I have to read and then I have to go back and make sure it falls under the same number ID number. That part is a little bit complicated from my perspective, because that's what I use the most."
"The product has issues with scanning."
"I would ask Veracode to be a lot more engaged with the customer and set up live sessions where they force the customer to engage with Veracode's technical team. Veracode could show them a repo, how they should do things, this is what these results mean, here is a dashboard, here's the interpretation, here's where you find the results."
"There is much to be desired of UI and user experience. The UI is very slow. With every click, it just takes a lot of time for the pages to load. We have seen this consistently since getting this solution. The UI and UX are very disjointed."
"I would like to see them provide more content in the developer training section. This field is really changing each day and there are flaws that are detected each day. Some sort of regular updates to the learning would help."
"The reports on offer are too verbose."
"I've seen slightly better static analysis tools from other companies when it comes to speed and ease of use."
"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"They have to improve support."
"Sometimes it doesn't work so well."
"AppScan is too complicated and should be made more user-friendly."
"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
HCL AppScan is ranked 15th in Application Security with 7 reviews while Kiuwan is ranked 20th in Application Security with 4 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.0, while Kiuwan is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes "Improves application security, identifies gaps, and performs well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kiuwan writes "Scalable with good remediation capabilities and good stabilty". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, OWASP Zap and Checkmarx, whereas Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx, Snyk and Mend. See our HCL AppScan vs. Kiuwan report.
See our list of best Application Security vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application 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.
