Primary use is code standards, or code quality. It's worked out okay. I find it is light on the security side though.
We brought into our CI pipeline to see if we could help our developers fix issues and identify issues sooner.
Primary use is code standards, or code quality. It's worked out okay. I find it is light on the security side though.
We brought into our CI pipeline to see if we could help our developers fix issues and identify issues sooner.
As far as code quality goes, I like it. It doesn't seem to do well when it comes to vulnerabilities on the security side. It may be that we don't have the right plugins, or we don't have the right add-ons.
It seems to be very stable. I haven't had many issues with it.
We just upgraded to the 6.7 version, which has been performing well.
We haven't had any issues to date. We haven't had a huge number of projects to date. We're slowly slowing the uptake from some of our internal teams, but it seems to be fairly scalable.
I haven't had to use technical support.
The initial setup was fairly straightforward.
The price point on SonarQube is good.
We are looking into corporate security and a couple different tooling options for doing data code analysis and security scanning.
We have looked into a few options:
We are looking at using another product to compliment it for security reasons.
Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:
We use the tool to check our code. It's used for static quality checks.
The product is simple.
The product's pricing could be lower.
I have been using the product for two years.
The tool is stable.
The product is easy to deploy and update.
We use the tool's community edition.
I would rate the product an eight out of ten.
We use the solution to do quality code analysis for keeping track of security hotspots. We also use it to avoid the delivery of problems as the result of new code from our partners who may be developing software for systems, making improvements and carrying out bug corrections. These are the features of SonarQube of which I am aware.
SonarQube is a fantastic tool which saves us precious time. Prior to using the solution, all our code analysis was manual and this was very time consuming. The increase in the number of projects, including those involving the development team, meant that it was becoming increasingly challenging to keep up with our delivery schedules. SonarQube helped a lot in this regard. So too, the wonderful tool from Eclipse, SonarLint, was very helpful. These solutions allow the partners who develop our system, our code, to receive on-the-fly analysis of their computers. This affords delivery of a much more reliable code, something which allows us to focus our work on more aggregated value operations.
I am struggling to come up with an area needing improvement. I am a big fan of SonarQube. I do have familiarity with the solution, but not extensively on a daily basis in respect of development.
This said, we did have some trouble with the LDAP integration for the console.
As our company is not primarily IT-related we are late comers when it comes to adopting new technology. As such, we started using the community version of SonarQube around eight to ten months ago.
I have limited personal experience working with the solution. I have a colleague who works with me and she is actually engaged in its operation. My role is to provide guidance in how to implement products.
She works more in implementing the installation of the solution, in deploying the projects on SonarQube. But, I have a little more context with this tool.
I am a customer of SonarQube.
At the moment, SonarQube is deployed on-premises. We have an installation running in one of our servers.
When we deploy on-cloud, we normally use Amazon Web Services.
I rate SonarQube as a ten out of ten, easily. I think its fantastic, a wonderful tool. Even if I don't use it directly, it frees me up to focus on other tasks in my daily routine.
We usually do the development in Java, and when we finish the development, we usually run the SonarQube tests and review the critical level, bugs, and security issues. We also review the license and the web issues and try to solve them, and then pass again through SonarQube.
We usually deploy it in the cloud, but sometimes we also have on-premises solutions.
It has very good scalability and stability.
We also use Fortify, which is another tool to find security errors. Fortify is a better security tool. It is better than SonarQube in finding errors. Sometimes, SonarQube doesn't find some of the errors that Fortify is able to find. Fortify also has a community, which SonarQube doesn't have.
Its installation is a little bit complex. We need to install a database, install the product, and specify the version of the database and the product. They can simplify the installation and make it easier. We use docker for the installation because it is easier to use.
Its dashboard needs to be improved. It is not intuitive. It is hard to understand the interface, and it can be improved to provide a better user experience.
I have been using SonarQube for two years.
Its stability is very good.
It has very good scalability. In my company, we have less than 15 users. They are mostly developers.
I have not used the support.
I have used Codestyle and a few other tools. SonarQube is similar to other tools.
Its installation is a little bit complex. They can simplify the installation and make it easier.
We didn't evaluate other options.
I would rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.
Our primary use case is to provide more coverage and reduce the reliance on code reviews alone. It also provides confidence and helps begin a path towards continuous improvement.
This has improved our process because it allows us to pick up on a lot of the smaller best practices that might otherwise be missed, in addition to ensuring code quality is not compromised between builds.
The most valuable features are the wide array of languages, multiple languages per project, the breakdown of bugs, and the description of vulnerabilities and code smells (best practices).
A robust credential scanner would be a huge bonus as it would remove the need for yet another niche product with additional cost, also gives the benefit of a single pane of glass view, although we still need white source bolt for 3rd part library scanning. The integration into docker builds could be better as pulling the latest version of the scanner, setting the path and then invoking the scan is an extra overhead to manage between versions of the scanner. An apt-get and scan start with the key passed as a variable would be a nicer implementation. Have not looked into SSL for the management page yet but hoping that goes smoothly.
We have only used this solution for a few weeks, but so far we have had no issues at all.
My impression of the scalability is good, as it appears that it can support a much larger number of projects than we have.
We have had no need to contact technical support.
I did not use another solution prior to this one.
The setup took a bit of work, but that was because we were combining Docker, Kubernetes, Azure Key Vault, and the Azure PaaS SQL Server.
We took care of the implementation in-house.
In terms of ROI, it is difficult to put a number against code quality. For the cost of hosting it, I would say very good if you do not have a solution to start with.
A self-hosted SonarQube on a Kubernetes cluster is very cost efficient if you already have the infrastructure and don’t need the premium features.
We evaluated the Checkmark Software Exposure Platform and Veracode, but they were expensive for a first go.
We use the solution for security vulnerabilities, static code analysis, and a few code quality issues like code smells. We mostly concentrate on security vulnerabilities.
SonarQube is admin friendly.
SonarQube is not development-centric like Snyk. The product gives an IDE plug-in called SonarLint. It needs to be expanded more. SonarLint is very limited.
I have been using the solution for the last five years.
The solution is quite mature. We did not have many issues.
The tool is very scalable.
Since it is an open-source product, we need to purchase support. However, the enterprise edition comes with a support package. The support package is really good. We get good support. We’ll have problems if we do not have support. I rate the support team a seven or eight out of ten. The quality of support depends on the support package we get. We had a limited package, so our support was at that level.
I have worked with Snyk. Snyk is more developer friendly. I have also worked with Coverity. SonarQube has features that are similar to Snyk and Coverity. So, SonarQube is better because it is an open-source tool.
The tool is easy to install compared to other products. We have to do basic things like installing our database and web applications. I do not find many problems with installation. The time taken for deployment depends on the nature of the setup and whether we are doing it for a large enterprise. The installation is quite simple, but it took a week to plan it. We had a good IT setup, which helped us. We do not need many people for implementation. It depends on the project structure.
Our IT team installed the solution. The product is easy to maintain. We have a mature system, so we do not have many issues. To manage reports, we need people to run scans. However, we need only one person to manage the environment.
It's an open-source product. All other solutions are commercial.
SonarQube is introducing a developer edition, but I have not explored it yet. We are using the enterprise edition of the solution. My advice to other users would depend on their requirements. If an organization has Synopsys products, Coverity would be the right choice for them. However, it is costly. SonarQube has an open-source and enterprise edition along with support packages, which is really good. If someone wants a developer-friendly tool, then Snyk would be a good choice. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
I like that it has a better dashboard compared to Clockwork. It's also stable.
Technical support and the price could be better.
I have been using SonarQube for seven or eight years.
SonarQube is quite good in terms of stability.
Technical support could be better. If we request support, it's a little bit delayed, and it's not consistent on email.
SonarQube price is a little bit higher than Kiuwan's. Kiuwan also gives a little bit of flexibility in terms of pricing.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give SonarQube an eight.
SonarQube can be used to analyze application code. We are testing SonarQube with some of our other products. We use the Sonar Link plugin with Teamscale, which is then applied to the main product we are using.
I am only interested in the security features in SonarQube. There are plenty of features other features, such as test coverage, code anomalies, and pointer access are handled by the business logic teams. They get the reports and they have to fix them in JIRA or Bugzilla.
We have to combine several products in order to cover as many flaws that might exist in the code. We have to integrate several products to set the security functionality of the product. SonarQube should have better functionality to cover all areas of security limiting our need for other products.
We have tens of millions of code to be analyzed and processed. There can be some performance degradation if we are applying Sonar Link to large code or code that is complex. When the code had to be analyzed is when we ran into the main issues. There were several routines involved to solve those performance issues but this process should be improved.
I have been using this solution for approximately three years.
There can be some stability issues.
I have used Veracode.
I have evaluated many other solutions similar to SonarQube.
I rate SonarQube a six out of ten.