"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."
"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."
"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."
"The coding standards in our development group have improved. From scanning our code we've learned the patterns and techniques to make our code more secure. An example would be SQL injection. We have mitigated all the SQL injection in our applications."
"Veracode creates a list of issues. You can go through them one by one and click through to a new window with all the information about the issue discovered."
"When we do have errors, Veracode is always available, their consultants, to help us either mitigate the error, or provide technical assistance on pointing exactly where the problem is and how we could probably fix it. I'm always amazed at how knowledgeable they are."
"The best feature is definitely the detailed reports. It provides code-related queries in the order of high, medium, and low depending on what we need to do. Veracode is user-friendly as well."
"Our development team use this solution for static code analysis and pen testing."
"The article scanning is excellent."
"Veracode is very easy to use."
"Code scanning is the most valuable feature."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."
"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."
"It can have more APIs and capabilities to handle other things well. We were doing a trial for it. There were two things that I looked at: one was uploading some Java-related content and the other was uploading database SQL files and having the review done on the quarterback. The Java portion of it worked fine, and it was pretty seamless, but the database portion was not. We uploaded some files to use for vulnerabilities, and the tell-all portion of it was pretty easy. We uploaded a war file and Java files, and we got the reports back on these. They were pretty clear to understand. We did the same thing for the database portion for the most part. However, the content wasn't getting uploaded in a predictable fashion, and it was slow and hard to get done. We had to do it over and over. After it indicated that the content was uploaded, there were no results. There were zero search findings. It was possibly a user error, something that we didn't do correctly, but they had acknowledged that it was something they were currently enhancing. This is something that could be made easier if they haven't already done that. I don't know how many releases they've had in that timeframe. I haven't looked at it since then. It was a trial period."
"When we scan binary, when we perform binary analysis, it could go faster. That has a lot to do with the essence of scanning binary code, it takes a little bit longer. Certain aspects, depending on what type of code it is, take a little long, especially legacy code."
"Static scanning takes a long time, so you need to patiently wait for the scan to achieve. I also think the software could be more accurate. It isn't 100 percent, so you shouldn't completely rely on Veracode. You need to manually verify its findings."
"The solution does not support Dynamic Application Security Testing."
"From the usability perspective, it is not up to date with the latest trends. It looks very old. Tools such as Datadog, New Relic, or infrastructure security tools, such as AWS Cloud, seem very user-friendly. They are completely web-based, and you can navigate through them pretty quickly, whereas Veracode is very rigid. It is like an old-school enterprise application. It does the job, but they need to invest a little more on the usability front."
"It's very expensive for a small organization."
"The scanning could be improved, because some scans take a bit of time."
"The area with the most room for improvement is the speed and responsiveness of the query, as it is usually very slow."
Earn 20 points
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
Synopsys Defensics is ranked 5th in Fuzz Testing Tools while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 186 reviews. Synopsys Defensics is rated 8.6, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Synopsys Defensics writes "Technical support provided protocol-specific documentation to prove that some positives were not false". 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 ". Synopsys Defensics is most compared with Snyk, SonarQube, Invicti, Fortify on Demand and Blue Cedar, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx, Snyk, Fortify on Demand and OWASP Zap.
We monitor all Fuzz Testing 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.