We performed a comparison between SonarCloud and Spirent CyberFlood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs."
"For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"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."
SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews while Spirent CyberFlood is ranked 26th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 4 reviews. SonarCloud is rated 8.4, while Spirent CyberFlood is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spirent CyberFlood writes "I like the solution's flexibility". SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and OWASP Zap, whereas Spirent CyberFlood is most compared with Ixia BreakingPoint and Ixia BreakingPoint VE. See our SonarCloud vs. Spirent CyberFlood report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
