We performed a comparison between Qualys Web Application Scanning and Sonatype Lifecycle 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."The interface is user-friendly and easy to understand."
"It works with many different products."
"Its most valuable features are patch management, vulnerability management, and PCI compliance."
"Licensing is the most valuable. Qualys provides the best licensing for companies. It is the best product for the development purposes of web applications. The product has a lot of integrations."
"We have experienced quick customer support. They have a complete list of our previous issues along with our history, which makes it faster for them to solve issues."
"Qualys' process of updating signatures is something we really appreciate, and it's way ahead of its industry peers."
"It is a very stable solution."
"With our vulnerabilities under control, it's putting our services in compliance and minimizing our risk for exposure."
"It scans and gives you a low false-positive count... The reason we picked Lifecycle over the other products is, while the other products were flagging stuff too, they were flagging things that were incorrect. Nexus has low false-positive results, which give us a high confidence factor."
"We really like the Nexus Firewall. There are increasing threats from npm, rogue components, and we've been able to leverage protection there. We also really like being able to know which of our apps has known vulnerabilities."
"Its engine itself is most valuable in terms of the way it calculates and decides whether a security vulnerability exists or not. That's the most important thing. Its security is also pretty good, and its listing about the severities is also good."
"The policy engine is really cool. It allows you to set different types of policy violations, things such as the age of the component and the quality: Is it something that's being maintained? Those are all really great in helping get ahead of problems before they arise. You might otherwise end up with a library that's end-of-life and is not going to get any more fixes."
"Lifecycle lets developers see any vulnerabilities or AGPL license issues associated with code in the early stages of development. The nice thing is that it's built into the ID so that they can see all versions of a specific code."
"The value I get from IQ Server is that I get information on real business risks. Is something compliant, are we using the proper license?"
"The integration of Lifecycle is really good with Jenkins and GitHub; those work very well. We've been able to get it to work seamlessly with them so that it runs on every build that we have."
"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."
"The support could be faster."
"When comparing this solution to Veracode, Veracode has good interactive features and gives a clear understanding of what the vulnerabilities are, which error line of the vulnerability is on and what can be done. It gives interactive features, whereas this solution does not give a clear understanding of where or how to fix the problem."
"In certain cases, this product does have false positives, which the company should work on."
"Sometimes the response time is low because the handshake fails, and then you have to re-login and start again."
"There's a distinction between internal and external scanning processes that could be streamlined. Currently, for internal scanning, specific configurations and scanner appliances need to be deployed within the network, which differs from the simpler setup for external scans. This dual process complicates the setup for comprehensive scanning coverage."
"The product should allow users to upload their payloads."
"We procured around 110 licenses for Web Application Scanning, but we have issues running concurrent scans. I don't currently have the option to trigger scans for all 100-plus websites. The default limit is around 10 conference scans. It's not very scalable, to be honest, because of the limitation that they put on concurrent scans."
"The UI is not user-friendly and you don't have a yearly reporting facility where you can slice and dice in different jobs."
"We do not use it for more because it is still too immature, not quite "finished." It is missing important features for making it a daily tool. It's not complete, from my point of view..."
"It would be helpful if it had a more detailed view of what has been quarantined, for people who don't have Lifecycle licenses. Other than that, it's pretty good."
"Their licensing is expensive."
"One thing that it is lacking, one thing I don't like, is that when you label something or add a status to it, you do it as an overall function, but you can't go back and isolate a library that you want to call out individually and remove a status from it. It's still lacking some functionality-type things for controlling labels and statuses. I'd like to be able to apply it across all of my apps, but then turn it off for one, and I can't do that."
"Nexus Lifecycle is multiple products. One drawback I've noticed is that there are some differences in the features between the products within Lifecycle. They need to maintain the same structure, but there are some slight differences."
"One thing that I would like to give feedback on is to scan the binary code. It's very difficult to find. It's under organization and policies where there are action buttons that are not very obvious. I think for people who are using it and are not integrated into it, it is not easy to find the button to load the binary and do the scan. This is if there is no existing, continuous integration process, which I believe most people have, but some users don't have this at the moment. This is the most important function of the Nexus IQ, so I expect it should be right on the dashboard where you can apply your binary and do a quick scan. Right now, it's hidden inside organization and policies. If you select the organization, then you can see in the top corner that there is a manual action which you can approve. There are multiple steps to reach that important function that we need. When we were initially looking at the dashboard, we looked for it and couldn't find it. So, we called our coworker who set up the server and they told us it's not on the dashboard."
"If there is something which is not in Maven Central, sometimes it is difficult to get the right information because it's not found."
"Sometimes we face difficulties with Maven Central... if I'm using the 1.0.0 version, after one or two years, the 1.0.0 version will be gone from Maven Central but our team will still be using that 1.0.0 version to build. When they do builds, it won't build completely because that version is gone from Maven Central. There is a difference in our Sonatype Maven Central."
More Qualys Web Application Scanning Pricing and Cost Advice →
Qualys Web Application Scanning is ranked 18th in Application Security Tools with 31 reviews while Sonatype Lifecycle is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 42 reviews. Qualys Web Application Scanning is rated 7.8, while Sonatype Lifecycle is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Qualys Web Application Scanning writes "A stable solution that can be used for infrastructure vulnerability scanning and web application scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sonatype Lifecycle writes "Seamless to integrate and identify vulnerabilities and frees up staff time". Qualys Web Application Scanning is most compared with OWASP Zap, Veracode, SonarQube, Fortify WebInspect and Rapid7 AppSpider, whereas Sonatype Lifecycle is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, GitLab and HCL AppScan. See our Qualys Web Application Scanning vs. Sonatype Lifecycle 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.