Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Seeker Interactive vs SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Seeker Interactive
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (18th), Mobile Threat Defense (16th), API Security (24th)
SonarQube Server (formerly ...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
117
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (1st), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Seeker Interactive and SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Seeker Interactive is designed for Internet Security and holds a mindshare of 0.1%.
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube), on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 20.8% mindshare, down 26.4% since last year.
Internet Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Seeker0.1%
Cisco Umbrella34.6%
Zscaler Internet Access32.4%
Other32.900000000000006%
Internet Security
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)20.8%
Checkmarx One10.2%
Veracode8.0%
Other61.0%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

San K - PeerSpot reviewer
More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need. The purposes for which applications are designed may differ in practice in the industry, and because of this, there will always be tools that sometimes report false positives. Thus, there should be some means with which I can customize the way that Seeker learns about our applications, possibly by using some kind of AI / ML capability within the tool that will automatically reduce the number of false positives that we get as we use the tool over time. Obviously, when we first start using the scanning tool there will be false positives, but as it keeps going and as I keep using the tool, there should be a period of time where either the application can learn how to ignore false positives, or I can customize it do so. Adding this type of functionality would definitely prevent future issues when it comes to reporting false positives, and this is a key area that we have already asked the vendor to improve on, in general. On a different note, there is one feature that isn't completely available right now where you can integrate Seeker with an open-source vulnerability scanner or composition analysis tool such as Black Duck. I would very much like this capability to be available to us out-of-the-box, so that we can easily integrate with tools like Black Duck in such a way that any open source components that are used in the front-end are easily identified. I think this would be a huge plus for Seeker. Another feature within Seeker which could benefit from improvement is active verification, which lets you actively verify a vulnerability. This feature currently doesn't work in certain applications, particularly in scenarios where you have requested tokens. When we bought the tool, we didn't realize this and we were not told about it by the vendor, so initially it was a big challenge for us to overcome it and properly begin our deployment.
Sthembiso Zondi - PeerSpot reviewer
Consistent improvements in code quality and security with effective integration and reliable technical support
The features of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) that I find most useful are the suggestions received from reviewing the code. When they review the code, they provide suggestions on how to fix it, and we find those very useful from a development perspective. We use SonarQube Server's (formerly SonarQube) centralized management and visualization of code quality metrics on the dashboard because that's the executive dashboard that we send to the executives to show where we are in terms of quality, security, and where the company can improve. We use that for organizational improvement purposes. The ability to tailor metrics tracking in SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) has been beneficial to my team. There are team-specific dashboards which are related to specific repositories they utilize, and we have that aggregative dashboard that shows the whole organization's performance. We can drill down per specific repository, which makes it easier for the team to improve specific things.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
"There's plenty of documentation available to users."
"SonarQube is good in terms of code review and to report on basic vulnerabilities in your applications."
"We use this solution for qualitative coding. We make use of the SonarLint plugin as well as the dashboard."
"The freemium version of SonarQube Server offers excellent value, especially compared to the high costs of Snyk."
"It is very good at identifying technical debt."
"The SonarQube dashboard looks great."
"The reporting and the results are quick. It gets integrated within the pipeline well."
"SonarQube is useful for controlling all of our Azure task tracking and scanning."
 

Cons

"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
"I would like to see dynamic code analysis in the next version of the software."
"There needs to be a shareable reporting piece or something we can click and generate easily."
"A better design of the interface and add some new rules."
"We previously experienced issues with security but a segregated security violation has been implemented and the issues we experienced are being fixed."
"Code security could be better. They are already focusing on it, but I see a lot of improvement opportunities over there. I can see a lot of false positives in terms of security. They need to make the tests more accurate so that the false positives are not detected so frequently. It would also help if they provided us with an installer."
"If I configure a project in SonarQube, it generates a token. When we're compiling our code with SonarQube, we have to provide the token for security reasons. If IP-based connectivity is established with the solution, the project should automatically be populated without providing any additional token. It will be easy to provide just the IP address. It currently supports this functionality, but it makes a different branch in the project dashboard. From the configuration and dashboard point of view, it should have some transformations. There can be dashboard integration so that we can configure the dashboard for different purposes."
"SonarQube could be improved by implementing inter-procedural code analysis capabilities, allowing for a more comprehensive detection of defects and vulnerabilities across the entire codebase."
"We had some issues where the Quality Gate check sometimes gets stuck and it is unclear."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."
"I do not know about the pricing as I am using the community edition, which is free. But I compared the pricing with Sigma, and it is higher than SonarQube."
"The costs for this application, for the kind of job it does, are pretty decent."
"This is open source."
"We did not purchase a license (required for C++ support), but this option was considered."
"Get the paid version which allows the customized dashboard and provides technical support."
"We use the free version; there are no hidden costs or licensing required."
"SonarQube price is a little bit higher than Kiuwan's. Kiuwan also gives a little bit of flexibility in terms of pricing."
"I am satisfied with the pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Internet Security solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Government
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise75
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Sonar
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

El Al Airlines and Société Française du Radiotelephone
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco, Zscaler, iboss and others in Internet Security. Updated: August 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.