We performed a comparison between Klocwork and Spirent CyberFlood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"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."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"The most valuable feature is the Incremental analysis."
"The tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"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."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"I believe it should support more languages, such as Python and JavaScript."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"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."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
Klocwork is ranked 18th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews while Spirent CyberFlood is ranked 33rd in Application Security Tools with 4 reviews. Klocwork is rated 8.2, while Spirent CyberFlood is rated 8.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spirent CyberFlood writes "I like the solution's flexibility". Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and Checkmarx One, whereas Spirent CyberFlood is most compared with Ixia BreakingPoint and Ixia BreakingPoint VE. See our Klocwork vs. Spirent CyberFlood report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.