Veracode and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks offer competitive pricing and valuable security features. Veracode has mixed reviews on customer support and setup complexity, while Prisma Cloud receives positive feedback in these areas. Veracode emphasizes ROI and comprehensive security testing, while Prisma Cloud focuses on cost savings and compliance automation.
The summary above is based on 283 interviews we conducted recently with Veracode and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"I've been really pleasantly surprised with how Prisma Cloud is, over time, covering more and more of the topics I care about, and listening to customer feedback and growing the product in the right directions."
"Prisma Cloud is quite simple to use. The web GUI is powerful. Prisma Cloud scans the overall architecture of the AWS network to identify open ports and other vulnerabilities, then highlights them."
"The solution gives us a lot of visibility across all of our cloud solutions."
"CSPM is the most valuable feature for any organization that runs its workloads in the cloud."
"One of the main reasons we like Prisma Cloud so much is that they also provide an API. You can't expect to give someone an account on Prisma Cloud, or on any tool for that matter, and say, "Go find your things and fix them." It doesn't work like that... We pull down the information from the API that Prisma Cloud provides, which is multi-cloud, multi-account—hundreds and hundreds of different types of alerts graded by severity—and then we can clearly identify that these alerts belong to these people, and they're the people who must remediate them."
"Prisma Cloud has enabled us to take a very strong preventive approach to cloud security. One of the hardest things with cloud is getting visibility into workloads. With Prisma Cloud, you can go in and get that visibility, then set up policies to alert on risky behavior, e.g., if there are security groups or firewall ports open up. So, it is very helpful in preventing configuration errors in the cloud by having visibility. If there are issues, then you can find them and fix them."
"It also provides us with a single tool to manage our entire cloud architecture. In fact, we are using a multi-account strategy with our AWS organization. We use Prisma as a single source of truth to identify high- or medium-severity threats inside our organization."
"I would say Twistlock is a fairly sophisticated tool."
"We have to look at it from the perspectives of how important it is to fix something and when it should be prioritized for fixing. The JSON output from the agent-based scans gives us the CVS core, and that makes things much easier."
"One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important."
"The recommendations and frequent updates are the most valuable features of Veracode."
"The innovative features offered by Veracode are excellent."
"The article scanning is excellent."
"The solution can scan old databases and old code written 20 years back."
"The security team can track the remediation and risk acceptance statistics."
"The source composition analysis had very good reporting."
"The information presented in the UI sometimes doesn't look intuitive enough."
"One major observation is that it is not possible to implement Prisma Cloud on-premises. This is the limitation. Prisma Cloud itself is on a cloud. It is sitting on AWS and Google Cloud. It is a SaaS solution, but some of my clients have a local regulatory requirement, and they want to install it locally on their premises. That capability is not there, but government entities and ministries want to have Prisma Cloud installed locally."
"They are missing some compatibility details in their documentation."
"We are encountering issues with the new permissions required for AWS integration with Prisma."
"There is room for improvement on the logging and monitoring front because it's still not as holistic as I would want it to be."
"The alignment of Twistlock Defender agents with image repositories needs improvement. These deployed agents have no way of differentiating between on-premise and cloud-based image repositories. If I deploy a Defender agent to secure an on-premise Kubernetes cluster, that agent also tries to scan my ECR image repositories on AWS. So, we have limited options for aligning those Defenders with the repositories that we want them to scan. It is scanning everything rather than giving us the ability to be real granular in choosing which agents can scan which repositories."
"We face some GUI issues related to new permissions for AWS. So far, we don't have any automation to complete them through the GUI. We have to manually update the permissions. Our customers have faced some issues with that."
"The Palo Alto support needs to improve."
"An area for improvement in Veracode is the time that it takes to scan large projects, as that makes it difficult to fit into our CI/CD pipelines."
"Scheduling can be a little difficult. For instance, if you set up recurring scheduled scans and a developer comes in and says, "Hey, I have this critical release that happened outside of our normal release patterns and they want you to scan it," we actually have to change our schedule configuration and that means we lose the recurring scheduling settings we had."
"We connected with Veracode's support a couple of times, and we got a different answer each time."
"The scans were sometimes not accurate in version 2022. There were some false positives in the vulnerability reports. We used to get false positives, and we were responsible for checking all of the alerts and determining whether they were true positives or false positives. They might have already improved it. If they have not, they can look into how to mitigate false positives."
"It should include more informational, low level, vulnerability summaries and groupings. Large related groups of low level vulnerabilities may amount to a design flaw or another avenue for attack."
"We tried to create an automatic scanning process for Veracode and integrate it into our billing process, but it was easier to adopt it to repositories based on GIT. Until now, our source control repository was Azure DevOps Server (Microsoft TFS) to managing our resources. This was not something that they supported. It took us some sessions together before we successfully implemented it."
"It does not have a reporting structure for an OS-based vulnerability report, whereas its peers such as Fortify and Checkmarx have this ability. Checkmarx also provides a better visibility of the code flow."
"If the dynamic scan is improved, then the speed might go up. That is somehow not happening. We have raised this concern. It might also help if they could time limit scans to 24 hours instead of letting them go for three days. Then, whatever results could be shared, even if the scan is not complete, that would definitely help us."
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Container Security with 83 reviews while Veracode is ranked 4th in Container Security with 194 reviews. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Snyk, Fortify on Demand and OWASP Zap. See our Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container 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.
