We performed a comparison between WhiteSource and SonarQube based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: SonarQube comes out on top in this comparison. It is high performing and user-friendly. In addition, it is less expensive than WhiteSource.
"The dashboard view and the management view are most valuable."
"The vulnerability analysis is the best aspect of the solution."
"WhiteSource is unique in the scanning of open-source licenses. Additionally, the vulnerabilities aspect of the solution is a benefit. We don't use WhiteSource in the whole organization, but we use it for some projects. There we receive a sense of the vulnerabilities of the open-source components, which improves our security work. The reports are automated which is useful."
"We set the solution up and enabled it and we had everything running pretty quickly."
"We use a lot of open sources with a variety of containers, and the different open sources come with different licenses. Some come with dual licenses, some are risky and some are not. All our three use cases are equally important to us and we found WhiteSource handles them decently."
"Mend has reduced our open-source software vulnerabilities and helped us remediate issues quickly. My company's policy is to ensure that vulnerabilities are fixed before it gets to production."
"The inventory management as well as the ability to identify security vulnerabilities has been the most valuable for our business."
"WhiteSource helped reduce our mean time to resolution since the adoption of the product."
"This solution has the capability to analyze source code in almost all the languages in the market."
"One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development. There are rules that define various technologies—Java, C#, Python, everything—and these rules declare the coding standards and code quality. With SonarQube, everything is detectable during the time of development and continuous integration, which is an advantage. SonarQube also has a Quality Gate, where the code should reach 85%. Below that, the code cannot be promoted to a further environment, it should be in a development environment only. So the checks are there, and SonarQube will provide that increase. It also provides suggestions on how the code can be fixed and methods of going about this, without allowing hackers to exploit the code. Another valuable feature is that it is tightly integrated with third-party tools. For example, we can see the SonarQube metrics in Bitbucket, the code repository. Once I raise the full request, the developer, team lead, or even the delivery lead can see the code quality metrics of the deliverable so that they can make a decision. SonarQube will also cover all of the top OWASP vulnerabilities, however it doesn't have penetration testing or hacker testing. We use other tools, like Checkmarx, to do penetration testing from the outside."
"I like that it's easy to navigate not just in terms of code findings but you can actually see them in the context of your source code because it gives you a copy of your code with the items that it found and highlights them. You can see it directly in your code, so you can easily go back and make the corrections in the code. It basically finds the problems for you and tells you where they are."
"When comparing other static code analysis tools, SonarQube has fewer false-positive issues being reported. They have a lot of support for different tech stacks. It covers the entire developer community which includes Salesforce or it could be the regular Java.net project. It has actually sufficed all the needs in one tool for static code analysis."
"We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. ]"
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free."
"The product is simple."
"All the features of the solution are quite good."
"The only thing that I don't find support for on Mend Prioritize is C++."
"Mend supports most of the common package managers, but it doesn't support some that we use. I would appreciate it if they can quickly make these changes to add new package managers when necessary."
"We have been looking at how we could improve the automation to human involvement ratio from 60:40 to 70:30, or even potentially 80:20, as there is room for improvement here. We are discussing this internally and with Mend; they are very accommodating to us. We think they openly receive our feedback and do their best to implement our thoughts into the roadmap."
"I rated the solution an eight out of ten because WhiteSource hasn't built in a couple of features that we would have loved to use and they say they're on their roadmap. I'm hoping that they'll be able to build and deliver in 2022."
"On the reporting side, they could make some improvements. They are making the reports better and better, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to generate a report for our entire organization."
"The turnaround time for upgrading databases for this tool as well as the accuracy could be improved."
"They're working on a UI refresh. That's probably been one of the pain points for us as it feels like a really old application."
"At times, the latency of getting items out of the findings after they're remediated is higher than it should be."
"A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice."
"There needs to be a shareable reporting piece or something we can click and generate easily."
"SonarQube's detail in the security could be improved. It may be helpful to have additional details, with regards to Oracle PL/SQL. For example, it's neither as built nor as thorough as Java. For now, this is the only additional feature I would like to see."
"The product's pricing could be lower."
"Lacks sufficient visibility and documentation."
"It should be user-friendly."
"During the setup process, we only had one issue related to the number of available files. To perform the analysis, you have quite a lot of available file handles, so we had to increase that limit."
"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."
Mend.io is a software composition analysis tool that secures what developers create. The solution provides an automated reduction of the software attack surface, reduces developer burdens, and accelerates app delivery. Mend.io provides open-source analysis with its in-house and other multiple sources of software vulnerabilities. In addition, the solution offers license and policy violation alerts, has great pipeline integration, and, since it is a SaaS (software as a service), it doesn’t require you to physically maintain servers or data centers for any implementation. Not only does Mend.io reduce enterprise application security risk, it also helps developers meet deadlines faster.
Mend.io has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:
There are many benefits to implementing Mend.io. Some of the biggest advantages the solution offers include:
Reviews from Real Users
Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by PeerSpot users currently using the Mend.io solution.
Jeffrey H., System Manager of Cloud Engineering at Common Spirit, says, “Finding vulnerabilities is pretty easy. Mend.io (formerly WhiteSource) does a great job of that and we had quite a few when we first put this in place. Mend.io does a very good job of finding the open-source, checking the versions, and making sure they're secure. They notify us of critical high, medium, and low impacts, and if anything is wrong. We find the product very easy to use and we use it as a core part of our strategy for scanning product code moving toward release.”
PeerSpot reviewer Ben D., Head of Software Engineering at a legal firm, mentions, “The way WhiteSource scans the code is great. It’s easy to identify and remediate open source vulnerabilities using this solution. WhiteSource helped reduce our mean time to resolution since we adopted the product. In terms of integration, it's pretty easy.”
An IT Service Manager at a wholesaler/distributor comments, “Mend.io provides threat detection and an excellent UI in a highly stable solution, with outstanding technical support.”
Another reviewer, Kevin D., Intramural OfficialIntramural at Northeastern University, states, "The vulnerability analysis is the best aspect of the solution."
SonarQube is the leading tool for continuously inspecting Code Quality and Code Security, and guiding development teams during code reviews. SonarQube provides clear remediation guidance for 27 languages so developers can understand and fix issues, and so teams can deliver better and safer software. SonarQube integrates into your workflow to provide the right feedback at the right time: in-IDE with SonarLint, in pull requests, and in SonarQube itself. With over 225,000 deployments helping small development teams and global organizations, SonarQube provides the means for teams and companies around the world to own and impact their Code Quality and Code Security.
Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 30 reviews. Mend.io is rated 8.4, while SonarQube is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Open-source, stable, and finds the problems for you and tells you where they are". Mend.io is most compared with Black Duck, Snyk, Veracode, Checkmarx and Sonatype Lifecycle, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx, Coverity, SonarCloud, Veracode and OWASP Zap. See our Mend.io vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.