SonarQube Reviews

I have it integrated with our continuous integration server. On a scheduled basis, typically in the middle of the night, it'll do performance scans so that the results are available and viewable by the developers on the website. The scans are done automatically by using a continuous integration server, which is TeamCity.

We are using version 5.6.6. It is a very old version, but that's what we've been using. We haven't gotten around to updating it.

I like that it's easy to navigate not just in terms of code findings but you can actually see them in the context of your source code because it gives you a copy of your code with the items that it found and highlights them. You can see it directly in your code, so you can easily go back and make the corrections in the code. It basically finds the problems for you and tells you where they are.

The learning curve can be fairly steep at first, but then, it's not an entry-level type of application. It's not like an introduction to C programming. You should know not just C programming and how to make projects but also how to apply its findings to the bigger picture. I've had users who said that they wish it was easier to understand how to configure, but I don't know if that's doable because what it's doing is a very complicated thing. I don't know if it is possible to make a complicated thing trivially simple.

They could improve their documentation. There were some books written about it, but even when we first started using it, the books were out of date. It's more of a plea to some of the authors who have become experts in using it to revise their books. I'd buy a copy of it. SonarQube does a good job of supporting the open-source community, but some of the documentation tends to lag behind. That's not unique to SonarQube. It gives an opportunity to those who have taken the time to learn about it to author books and become resident experts or community experts. It'd be nice if some of those guys made another edition to support the open-source efforts that are there.

In terms of features, at this point, I don't have any requirements. We've been growing into it slowly, and we haven't really exhausted what it already has. When and if we get to a point where we are aggressively applying what it's telling us, we may reach a point where it's like, "If it could tell us this as well, that'd be nice." We haven't reached that point yet. We haven't listened to all of the advice that it's giving us now.

It has been a couple of years.

Any lack of stability is because it's being expanded and updated pretty much constantly. We haven't experienced any crashes or bugs. We do have an opportunity here coming up within the next few weeks of revisiting some of the ways we do things there.

It is definitely scalable. We plan to increase its usage.

Since we're using the open-source components, we use web searches and online resources. Once you get a little used to their website, they have a lot of information. The support, even for an older version, is pretty good. I've been able to find workable solutions. You just have to do a little searching.

We don't have stability issues. It hasn't crashed since we got it up and running, but there are some configurations or different options you can apply when you're scanning. So, you have to learn its language, and the information is available if you search the web.

Way back in the past, we used other static analysis tools like PC-lint or Gimpel Lint. I still have plans to resurrect some of that, but I'm of the mindset that the more opinions you get about your code, the better off you are. You get to look from different angles with different tools. In terms of the automated tool, SonarQube was the first one we had for getting into the DevOps generation of stuff.

We did have some issues, but they were because we didn't understand the relationship between different flavors. You've got the server, and the SonarQube service itself provides an HTTP type input. There are also versions of the scanners for different tools we're using, which are typically C++. We started with a mismatch of that. It may have been the server and the scanner, which runs on your client workstations. We had a mismatch of versions. After we dug into it a little bit and realized that was the problem, it was pretty straightforward. The setup from there was pretty trivial. 

You do need to know how to use a database. I most certainly use MySQL just because it's easily available on a minimal Linux install, CentOS. It's a Red Hat 7. It's BaseOS, a minimal install. It probably needed Java and a few tools that are fairly common. If you know how to set up a MySQL database, you can do it. If you know how to set up Java on Red Hat, which is pretty straightforward other than the fact that some path issues come into play, but that's just part of the game. Once you do that, it installs pretty easily.

We did have a consultant. He was looking at our overall engineering infrastructure, things beyond SonarQube. He was helpful in finding out, or pointing out, that it was the issue with the revisions. The versions of the different pieces weren't matching up. He did help with that, but in terms of putting it in, I did the validation work for validating the installation process and reproducibility for future users in case I leave the company and they need to recreate it. They've got the documentation to do so. So, I did all that. For an application of its complexity, it was fairly straightforward once we resolved the version issue.

Its deployment and maintenance can be done by one engineer.

We're using an older version because it is the open-source flavor of it and we can continue using it at no cost. We're not paying any licensing at all, which was another factor in choosing this route so that we can learn and grow with it and not be committed to licenses and other similar things. If we choose to get something else, we have to relearn, but we don't have to relicense. Basically, we're paying no license costs.

We did look at a lot of other ones. Some of the names I actually can't recall. There were code quality analyzers out there besides that. We did review them and settled on this one because it's very widely used, and the open-source capabilities are pretty well-supported to where you can use it without obligation. None of them are trivial to set up and use because they are doing a very complicated process. They all have their different ways of going about things, but you've got to understand any one of them. We picked this route.

You have to be willing to invest. For any tool of this magnitude, if you're going to say, "Well, we want to do the least we can possibly do and see what's the least we can get by with," you'll get the least possible benefit. My recommendation is that you do the opposite. You should consider everything it's telling you. You may not want to fix everything, but you should be aware of everything that's showing in your code. After that, you have the opportunity to look at your whole development process and just the way you do things and go back to your roots and look for ways to change things at the beginning that can have an impact. You have a big impact on the output of things towards the end, but maybe change the way you start things. Instead of trying to get the least that you can get with the least amount of effort, partner yourself with it as much as possible.

I would rate it an eight out of 10.

Our primary use case of SonarQube is getting feedback on code. We are using Spring Boot and Java 8. We are also using SonarLint, which is an Eclipse IDE plugin, to detect vulnerabilities during development. Once the developer finishes the code and commits the code into the Bitbucket code repository, the continuous integration pipeline will automatically run using Jenkins. As part of this pipeline, there is a build unit test and a SonarQube scan. All the parameters are configured as per project requirements, and the SonarQube scan will run immediately once the developer commits the code to the repository. The advantage of this is that we can see immediate feedback: how many vulnerabilities there are, what the code quality is, the code quality metrics, and if there are any issues with the changes that we made. Since the feedback is immediate, the developer can rectify it immediately and can further communicate changes. This helps us with product quality and having less vulnerabilities in the early stages of development. 

This solution is deployed on-premise. 

One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development. There are rules that define various technologies—Java, C#, Python, everything—and these rules declare the coding standards and code quality. With SonarQube, everything is detectable during the time of development and continuous integration, which is an advantage. SonarQube also has a Quality Gate, where the code should reach 85%. Below that, the code cannot be promoted to a further environment, it should be in a development environment only. So the checks are there, and SonarQube will provide that increase. It also provides suggestions on how the code can be fixed and methods of going about this, without allowing hackers to exploit the code. 

Another valuable feature is that it is tightly integrated with third-party tools. For example, we can see the SonarQube metrics in Bitbucket, the code repository. Once I raise the full request, the developer, team lead, or even the delivery lead can see the code quality metrics of the deliverable so that they can make a decision. SonarQube will also cover all of the top OWASP vulnerabilities, however it doesn't have penetration testing or hacker testing. We use other tools, like Checkmarx, to do penetration testing from the outside. 

SonarQube could be improved with more dynamic testing—basically, now, it's a static code analysis scan. For example, when the developer writes the code and does the corresponding unit test, he can cover functional and non-functional. So the SonarQube could be improved by helping to execute unit tests and test dynamically, using various parameters, and to help detect any vulnerabilities. Currently, it'll just give the test case and say whether it passes or fails—it won't give you any other input or dynamic testing. They could use artificial intelligence to build a feature that would help developers identify and fix issues in the early stages, which would help us deliver the product and reduce costs. 

Another area with room for improvement is in regard to automating things, since the process currently needs to be done manually.

Aside from other helpful features, the most important thing that SonarQube needs to do—the key feature—is to detect security vulnerabilities. The rest of the other features are helpful to the developer and the team to deliver the product faster, but security is a mandatory feature. 

As for additional features, SonarQube covers most of the languages, but there is still room for improvement covering the latest version of the tech stack—for example, Java 13. They're still improving, and they're focusing on SonarCloud nowadays. Currently, we aren't using all the top quality features of SonarCloud. I also think it would be helpful if SonarQube could integrate with Jira, a work management tool, or other communication tools, like Skype or Microsoft Teams, so that a bot could report directly to the developer. 

I have been using SonarQube for the past three years. 

The stability and performance of SonarQube are good. We use it on a daily basis, as part of our code development. 

As far as maintenance, it mainly happens when the product is being developed. There may be some features which can be enhanced, based on customer feedback and the tech stack, such as how we can improve performance of have a deployment with zero downtime. There are so many technologies coming, so many things happening, and there is always room for code improvements and the product we develop. Our top considerations are quality and security, which are being improved in a continuous process. There are many new features and enhancements coming in—for example, if you want to upgrade from the Java 6 version, then you can upgrade the tech stack, which will reduce the number of lines of code and improve performance. 

This solution is easy to scale. The instances in which we are deploying it are easy to scale because we are using it in production. We aren't supposed to deploy as part of the development, but the scalability feature is there because we are using Ansible, Kubernetes, and Docker. 

In our organization, there are currently around 25,000 people working with SonarQube. 

We also use Checkmarx and Snyk. One of the main differences between them and SonarQube is that they have dynamic testing and analysis, rather than static analysis. 

The initial setup wasn't a complex process. It was straightforward, and I had no issues. The deployment happened automatically and the pipeline was complete in three minutes. It depends on the scale of the project, the number of code repositories, the number of modules you are deploying, and all that. I would say deployment should take five minutes, maximum. 

We implemented this solution through an in-house team. Everything happens internally and we have our own internal tools, so there are no third-parties involved in development. 

I'm not too aware of the pricing because a different team covers that, but SonarQube has been on the market for a very long time, so I would guess the pricing would be decent. 

I rate SonarQube an eight out of ten. 

To those looking to implement SonarQube, I would advise you not to run it manually—integrate it with tools like Bitbucket and Jenkins, and make it automatic. If you change one line of code, the SonarQube should run automatically and give you the report. Don't go and run it manually and check the reports and all—it should run automatically to the entire code base, not to your particular module. So you need to configure that, as well as your project requirements and what code quality metrics will be achievable—like 85% or 95%—because you want code quality for a better product, without loopholes. You need to configure these things before starting to work with SonarQube. 

It is mainly used as part of the CI/CD pipeline through Azure DevOps and Jenkins to do static code analysis.

We have the enterprise version. In terms of deployment, on-premise is the best description because they have their own cloud, but it is not a real cloud. It is like VMware.

In some instances, the project stakeholders were able to implement quality gate control for code coverage, security alerts, and things like that. It greatly improved the quality of the product. If our test code coverage is 80% and a person commits a change that brings the code coverage to below 80%, that code cannot be merged. We've been able to improve the quality of the products that we produce by using SonarQube. We are using it as a gate.

It is a great tool in a situation where you have a dynamic team, and you sometimes hire staff or subcontractors from other companies. It provided us with the ability to implement quality gates in our project. We could look at the data and see which developers were producing quality code and which developers were not too worried about the quality. It helped us out with our junior devs. I know of a few cases where having this system helped our junior devs in taking their skills one level up because we had set up a hard quality gate.

My focus is mainly on the DevOps pipeline side of things, and from my perspective, the ease of use and configuration is valuable. It is pretty straightforward to take a deployment pipeline or CI/CD pipeline and integrate SonarQube into it.

A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice. 

It would also be nice if the discrepancy between the basic or free version and the enterprise version was less. In my opinion, some of the base functionality in the enterprise version should be in the basic version.

Currently, we have static code scanning, and we have the scanning of the Docker containers. It would be great if some sort of penetration testing could easily be implemented in SonarQube for deploying something and doing some basic security scans. Currently, we have to use third-party tools for that. If everything was all under one roof, it would be more comfortable, but I don't know if it is possible or feasible. It is a typical issue of centralization versus distribution. In our particular case, because we're using SonarQube for almost every other project, it would make sense, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it is the same case with everybody else.

I have been using this solution for four years in my current job.

I don't think I ever had a problem.

We haven't reached a point where it is anywhere near saturation. We haven't scaled it yet, and I don't know if it will ever happen. The way it is implemented right now is more than enough for what we need. 

We have used it in almost all projects of our client. It is a part of their process. It is used extensively, and it will be used for any future work that they might have where they develop any code that can be analyzed with SonarQube.

We probably have 30 or 40 users. Their roles are developer team leads, developers, and DevOps people. These are the three roles of people who use it on a daily basis and look at the reports and work with the system. At some point, the data might be shown to the actual client or somebody else.

I've never been in a situation where I needed their support.

I don't think that we used anything else previously. SonarQube was the first one.

It was straightforward. I wasn't technically involved in the deployment of SonarQube, but as far as I know, it was a matter of a few days.

We probably just bought the license and did it ourselves. For its deployment and maintenance, we don't have a dedicated person. It is one of the many systems that our internal IT team manages.

I don't have that data. I don't think that we've ever calculated that. 

My guess is that we have a yearly subscription. We use it quite extensively, so a monthly license wouldn't make sense. Yearly subscriptions are usually cheaper. 

In addition to the standard licensing fee, there is just the cost of running the hardware where it is hosted.

It is pretty straightforward, but if you don't intend to use it as a gate, it would just be a waste of time. You should invest in implementing such tools only when you have a clear understanding of how their results are going to be a part of a business process.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10. I've never had any kind of problems with it. I have some products because of which I have had a bad day, but I never had a bad day because of it.

We mainly need to do certain static analyses. While doing the coding, everybody sends a pool request. Before committing the code on the main branch, we need to ensure that the code is up to level. That is basically our way of working to ensure that whatever rules we have configured, whatever gates we have defined, that gets passed before committing the code into the main branch.

I like almost all of the features. We were initially using all these techniques by using different tools. 

The vulnerabilities and the code quality parameters are really important for us.

The initial setup is easy.

There's plenty of documentation available to users. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good.

The only features which I think are lagging are the reporting to generate a PDF report. That is not available currently in the development version. However, if it is available in the development version, then it will be really helpful for us. I checked with the team and it seems that it is only available in the enterprise version. If the report can be sent over email, that would really help.

For example, let's say if I need to report to management or management wants to see a dashboard based on what each project looks like. Those figures are not available. There needs to be a shareable reporting piece or something we can click and generate easily.  

The only pain area for us is due to the fact that we purchased the 1 million lines of code license for now. We are a service product company, so some projects were finished in maybe less than six months and then maybe that is not useful for us. We need to remove those projects so we can utilize those lines of code for another project. That's something we need to see about. We're not sure how that works.

The solution is quite stable. Before, I used to generate reports by using some manual techniques. Now those are available right in SonarQube. The flexibility of rule configurations is great.

We found the solution to be scalable. We already integrated SonarQube with our CI/CD pipeline in Azure DevOps, and it works really well. We also integrated with the Jenkins CI/CD pipeline, and we also linked with the Visual Studio using SonarLint. That works really well.

We plan on expanding and need more licenses. 

When we purchased the license, they actually charged an additional amount for the support. Therefore, we haven't bought the support. Plus, we already know SonarQube. We have enough team members available who already have experience in it. For that reason, support is not required from us. That said, across the internet or on Google, there is enough documentation available. Even on the SonarQube website, there is enough documentation. 

The initial setup is really straightforward. The supports are really good from the SonarQube. Enough documentation is also available. t's really straightforward to figure out how to do it.

We purchased a SonarQube developer license. We do not have the enterprise version.

We pay for licensing on a yearly basis.

On the pricing side, it's 3,000 Euros for 1 million lines of code. Even if you look at the open-source, the open-source almost provide similar functions. Of course, some additional language support, among other things, however, the rest is available in open-source. If they can reduce the price, then I believe more people will join the licensed version rather than open-source. Pricing is a bit high based on the fact that they're already providing the open-source for free, and that also includes almost all the necessary items. People will not pay for the license if they can get most items for free. I would suggest if they reduce the price, that definitely it will boost the business.

We already linked with the CI/CD pipeline, and everything is working really smoothly. We already got the additional language support also, which was not available in the open-source version. In the developer version, we have six-plus additional language support onboard. That is actually helpful for us. Overall, it's going really well. 

The overall look and feel, the way of presenting the information, is really nice - including the way we can assign items. Everything looks okay. I also already integrated the APA of SonarQube in my external system and that really works. I don't see any integration problems so far. I would suggest those considering the solution simply go for SonarQube as it works really well for any integration of any software or with any third-party tools, including Azure DevOps.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for the software scan and integrate the application, which is a dependency check for the scan. Our customers send us the already developed solution for functional tests and security scans.

Firstly, the integration with the pipeline is good. If you have the FICO pipeline integrated already, the depth of the pipeline will be good. Secondly, the solution is easy to understand. It took little time to learn and understand how to use data.

SonarQube has a community edition and an enterprise edition. The community edition is free, but the enterprise edition is not. In Thailand, we cannot use the enterprise edition because there are no resellers in Thailand. So we found many issues, like when you scan some source code, and if it's a problem, it appears the tool that we need to fix, but after our manual review, we found that we already did have something there. For example, it improves validation. But we did not get the input as it was already validated in another library. We called support and complained but have not received any information as we use the free version. We had to fix it on our own and could not escalate it to the tool's developer.

I have been using SonarQube for a year.

It is a stable product. I rate it seven out of ten.

I didn't have any scalability issues when we used the pipeline. But downloading the code and doing this again on a local laptop is quite slow, especially when somebody needs to try some code in a big and complex project. It takes about four to six hours. I don't know why it takes so long on a local laptop because it works fine in the integrated pipeline. For support in the integration pipeline, it could be nine or ten, but If it is on a local laptop, I think it would be only five.

As we are using the free version, there is no technical support available. But the documentation support is okay for us. We read it depending on the website, but we cannot escalate the issue to the SonarQube provider.

I used the Micro Focus Fortify, but the performance integration in the pipeline is faster in SonarQube. But in Fortify, the support is better as it is a commercial product, and we paid for it, so we can complain and get feedback in case of any issue. We complain if anything needs to be fixed, and they accept and fix it, but SonarQube does not have such a platform.

The initial setup is simple. It requires some security, but it's simple. It has some community to help with the technical information, and the technical team of the solution is also okay. It takes one or two hours to deploy. I was not involved in the integration in the pipeline, but I was involved in the solution installed on the local laptop.

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.

If you need the support of SonarQube, then use the enterprise version.

SonarQube should have a foundation in Thailand so that we can buy the enterprise version and get support. Secondly, SonarQube still does not support many languages, but I am still determining which ones. So if these two can be improved, it will be good.

I rate it seven out of ten.

I have used it to test clients' websites. After testing, it gives a deep overview of website bugs and issues. 

A good point about SonarQube is that it gives you the solutions to resolve your issues. At times, I find the blocker (during times of emergency code deployment) doesn't allow the code to be checked-in to the repository unless the violations are fixed, which should enable the user to bypass the number of lines that should be part of the written method. 

It improved our website's look and feel. 

We consider it a handy tool that helps to resolve our issues immediately. 

It is a good tool for evaluating technical debt and introducing junior developers to codification standards and good practices. There is an amazing code quality application that defines coding standards. 

The tool is pretty much useful for a technical lead to reduce his efforts in reviewing the codes. The tool has integration with several languages. 

SonarQube is a Code Quality Assurance tool that collects and analyzes source code and provides reports on the code quality of your project. It combines static and dynamic analysis tools and enables quality to be measured continuously over time.

The solution's most valuable features are its:

• Code quality
• Release quality code
• Code security
• Security analysis

SonarQube empowers all developers to write cleaner and safer code. You can grow as a developer.

Integrations Analysis results are right where your code lives.

It works well with GitHub.

It should be user-friendly. I keep looking for improvements after every update. 

PeerSpot users give SonarQube an average rating of 8 out of 10. 

SonarQube is most commonly compared to Checkmarx: SonarQube vs Checkmarx.

The SonarQube brand is trusted by many teams and it has been validated. It is one of the most recommended free application security testing solutions. 

SonarQube is really a good tool for SAST with seamless integration to your CI/CD pipeline. We have used it on our website and had good results.

I have been using SonarQube 8.9.7 for a long time (since we had some issues in our software dealing with many critical issues that needed to be resolved for clients). 

I recommend SonarQube as it is beginner-friendly and can resolve your issues with the proper usage of your website.

The dimensional stability of the impression materials depends on the time elapsed between the completion of the impression and their casting, thus storage time is critical to obtaining reliable casts.

Beyond listening, customer service is doing everything in one's power to efficiently and accurately serve each customer.

Positive

We did use another solution, however, we found issues such as:

• Ineffective time management
• Lack of instant communication
• Not receiving timely feedback
• Not receiving clear instructions or expectations
• Share time management apps and resources for students
• Utilize educational technology (“EdTech”)
• There's also a need to increase peer review

The solution is easy to do and understand. It's not complicated and it's easy. It's a relatively straightforward process.

According to conventional wisdom, an annual ROI of approximately 7% or greater is considered a good ROI for an investment in stocks.

We primarily use SonarQube for quality control on the software being deployed in our company. We had to control the open-source software we use. We develop software and have to create builds around it. As part of this process, we want to be sure of the security conformity for each module.

It is installed and plugged into a Kubernetes pipeline build system.

Using SonarQube benefits us because we are able to avoid the inclusion of malware in our applications. We can repair vulnerabilities and exploits from outside of the organization.

The performance is good.

The handling of the contents of Docker container images could be better. We are building microservices using Docker containers, and the image is embedding a lot of software. The verification in the image could be improved because you're able to check the image while building it, but if you are using a prebuilt container image then it's more difficult to do.

I have been using SonarQube for between three and four years.

This solution consumes resources but that's something that is needed. In terms of performance, it's okay. It depends on the power of the hardware and servers that you have.

This is a product that we use on a daily basis. We are constantly developing software and this is used as part of the process.

We have never had problems in terms of scalability, so it's good. We have a license for approximately 250 users.

The technical support is good.

We did not use another similar solution prior to this one.

The initial setup is a little bit complex, although that's because of the type of tooling that it is. It took one person perhaps two months to deploy it.

The main thing that takes time during deployment is to get the users accustomed to it and use it properly. Essentially, the longest part of the deployment is the training time. Change management for people is time-consuming.

We handled the deployment completely in-house.

It is difficult to estimate ROI because this product is similar to insurance. If things were broken then it could cause a lot of damage to the company.

Once we identified the need, I researched different solutions. I tried SonarQube and one or two others.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution varies based on the use case and infrastructure that they have. For large scale-deployment, it needs more container images because it's easier to maintain. For a small company, it may be fine without them.

Overall, this is a good product. The only suggestion that I have for improvement is deeper container image analysis. The verification is already good but it depends on the format of the image. If you are speaking about a classical format, like a table or a zip file, it's okay. But, if you are talking about container images, there is room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use SonarQube to find vulnerabilities in the source code, for better code quality, and code security.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free.

There could be better integration with other products.

It could have more functionality, and the updates could be faster.

People must be trained extensively before they can use it.

I have been using SonarQube for three years.

It's a software as a service that you can access from on-premise.

The stability is fine. With any software, you must ensure that you keep up to date with the software. As a result, when there are new ways to attack you, the software detects it. You must be prepared. You can't just put it in and forget about it, you have to stay current.

More than just an environment, it was a project. There were about a dozen developers and five testers to ensure that the developers used the tool before handing it over to the testers. To ensure that everything was in order.

I have not contacted technical support.

Previously, we used Fortify. The company that I worked for owned Fortify. We then sold Fortify to another company. We could look at other products to do the job.

The initial setup was straightforward. It only took about two weeks to deploy.

Like in anything, if you're too restricted, it can result in being problematic, the same if you are too loose. In terms of the length of time it takes to deploy, we try to find a happy medium. Two weeks is reasonable.

I am the team leader, and I was assisted with the deployment by another very knowledgeable individual. We are a team of two.

We have seen a return on investment. It finds potential vulnerabilities inside a program's code. If you catch it and you fix it, it's good.

It's an open-source solution, with no additional costs.

We evaluated other products such as Veracode, Checkmarx as well as SonarQube.

The main difference is that SonarQube is free.

I am an expert in so many things, including security experts. We looked at the various products and chose one. And the reason was that any tool, any automated tool that can detect errors, is preferable to none at all.

Most systems are vulnerable at the application level, which means that people who program in Java or.NET may be brilliant, but they don't know about the security. The advice is that those who work in development must also understand security. They must test for security in the same way they test for whether something is red or blue. My recommendation is to have some type of training and to be aware that the application level is the place where most people attack.

I would rate SonarQube a six out of ten.