SonarQube Reviews

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.

I use SonarQube for testing software.

The solution can verify vulnerabilities, code smells, and hotspots. It makes the software more secure and it helps make a junior or novice developer sharper.

The software testing tool capability could improve. It does not always integrate well. You have to use a specific plugin and the plugin does not always go in Apple's applications.

In the next release, they should add the ability to analyze containers.

I have been using SonarQube for approximately three years.

We have mostly software developers using this solution are there are approximately 50 using it.

I have used Snyk and it is more catered to a different audience than SolarQube.SolarQube is more for software developers.

The installation is straightforward, especially with the new Docker implementation.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

The process of purchasing the solution could improve.

This solution is a good static test tool for developers. It helps keep the maintainability and security of software.

I rate SonarQube an eight out of ten.

We use it as a gatekeeper for our external developers to follow the rules. If they don't comply with the rules within the source code, they cannot commit. 

It is working fine. It provides good value for money.

One thing to improve would be the integration. There is a steep learning curve to get it integrated.

I have been using this solution for maybe two years.

It is stable.

It is definitely scalable. Currently, we have six users.

We didn't contact them.

This was our first one.

Its initial setup is okay. It is not too difficult. It probably took a couple of hours.

One developer is enough for its deployment.

We pay €10 per month for this solution, which is good. It provides good value for money.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate SonarQube a nine out of 10.

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.

I'm a software development engineer and we are customers of SonarQube. 

SonarQube does SAST and SCAs pretty well. One of the important things for me, something that is different from a solution like Checkmarx, was that SonarQube had SonarLint that we can use for local scanning for developers. The product does well in scanning and vulnerability.  

SonarQube is missing specific SAST capabilities. In addition, when we have security issues we want to mitigate those and it seems that SonarQube doesn't persist with the mitigation. Each time it discovered a new scan it wiped out all the persistence that we had mitigated for previous vulnerabilities. Dynamic scanning is missing and there are issues with security scanning in terms of failing projects where it didn't pass a scan.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is quite stable. 

We don't have contact with technical support, any issues are solved by our operation team.

The initial setup wasn't too complicated. We have a number of teams of developers and around 150 users together with an operations team who maintain the infrastructure. From a user perspective we scan at least once a day. 

I looked at Checkmarx but it wasn't as straightforward as SonarQube because it's only supporting Linux and maybe Windows, but I wasn't able to find any local scanning support for Mac computers, and that was an issue. I'd like to learn more about Checkmarx. 

I would suggest looking at the pipelines and understanding usage scenarios in terms of what the customer is looking for. For instance, the mitigation persistence through the life cycle of a project is not there. For me, it's like a lack of tracking records of what to mitigate. It's something that you thought would be a part of the basics, but it's not there.

I think there's about 40% of the features I'd like to see that are missing in SonarQube, so I'd rate it a six out of 10.  

We use the product in our pipeline. We primarily use it for development testing tool.

We can see what's being flagged by whatever requirements in the environment that we're going to. SonarCube has these rules that you set up. You can set the rules and adjust them. It allows us to either be at 80% or whatever the case may be. If you set up these conditions that can tighten down the developer's coding.

It's convenient due to the fact that it's open-source. 

We're able to identify bugs and those kinds of things before we actually push anything into a staging or production area. It helps our developers work more efficiently as we can identify things in a code prior to it being pushed to where it needs to go. It's a great little loop. You see this, fix it, take it back. Versus, putting something into an environment and then everything is all broken. It's a good development test tool. 

Nowadays you can add extensions, similar to what you can do with the Jenkins tool, the CICB tool, the build tool. Jenkins can have a lot of plugins that interface with a lot of vendors or it can do a lot of things. Just like Google Chrome where you can bring in an extension, you can do the same here. In SonarQube, you can add something by just adding an extension that you may have to pay extra for, However, that add-on has additional functionality that the base software may not necessarily have in its core.

For example, Fortify has some kind of special capability that they have for checking and SonarQube has created an extension that allows the Fortify extensions. Right now, I have Fortify, however, it's in this product at a very modular level.

The solution is still maturing a bit.

You may need to purchase add-ons to get the useability you desire.

We've been using the solution for about two years at this point.

The solution is open-source. It's free to use. 

Not everybody uses SonarQube. However, if they do use SonarQube and they're trying to look for functionality, then an extension into SonarQube is the way to go. We, for example, love how we can have Fortify functionality via this product. I can't speak for all the other shops, right. That's just our workflow.

I'd rate the solution at a perfect ten out of ten. For what it does as far as static code analysis, it's pretty good.

We use SonarQube for testing, reviewing, and ensuring the quality of application code.

The most valuable features are the analysis and detection of issues within the application code.

The solution could improve by providing more advanced technologies.

I have been using the solution within the last 12 months.

The SonarQube is stable.

The installation is easy.

The price of this solution is more expensive than competitors. However, it works better than competitors.

I have evaluated other solutions.

I rate SonarQube an eight out of ten.

We are using this solution to check and monitor application code to ensure security quality.

The solution has helped us mitigate problems in applications before they were a bigger issue.

The solution could improve by having better-consulting services.

I have been using SonarQube within the last 12 months.

The stability is good.

The installation was straightforward, we have an internal team that does it.

We have a team in our organization that does the implementation, configuration, and maintenance of the solution.

The price of the solution could be reduced.

I rate SonarQube a ten out of ten.

I have used it in my previous company. In my current company, which I have joined recently, we don't use any of these tools. That's why I want to implement something for the company. I have the Community Edition of SonarQube. I am using one version prior to the latest one.

It was integrated with our build pipeline, and we had also customized the rules for the quality gate. For each release that got through SonarQube, it gave the results in terms of whether it was releasable or not. 

SLA was another use case. We internally had a rule that in case there are severity defects, they need to be fixed. If there is a false positive, it needs to be justified. That's the way it was used.

It assists during the development with SonarLint and helps the developer to change his approach or rather improve his coding pattern or style. That's one advantage I've seen. Another advantage is that we can customize the rules. 

I did an evaluation of the Enterprise Edition. It has the Portfolio view, which means you can roll up all your projects to the Portfolio level, and then it gives a visualization of each and every project's state in terms of security and other vulnerabilities.

It is very expensive. That's something that can be improved. 

I'm not sure if the latest vulnerabilities are being updated. When I compare it with Fortify on Demand (FoD), every now and then, they get all the latest and greatest versions for all these vulnerabilities as a rule pack. I'm not very sure about how that works in SonarQube, and how frequently they are updating the vulnerability databases and other things.

Their dashboarding is very limited. They can improve their dashboards for multiple areas, such as security review, maintainability, etc. They have all this information, so they should publish all this information on the dashboard so that the users can view the summary and then analyze it further. This is something that I would like to see in the next version. 

The portfolio-level dashboard is currently available only in the Enterprise Edition. They can have a similar dashboard in the Community Edition or at least in the Developer Edition. The portfolio-level dashboard is also very limited currently. There is hardly one report.

I have been using this solution for four years. 

It looks stable. So far, we haven't found any issues.

I contacted them once or twice. I am very satisfied with their support. I didn't have any concerns in terms of support.

It is straightforward. It takes very little time as compared to the other solutions.

It is very expensive. Its price should be improved.

I have worked on only two tools: one is Fortify on Demand, and the other one is SonarQube. Comparing these two, I would rate SonarQube an eight out of 10.

The solution is a static code analysis tool. That's basically what we use it for in our organization.

We bought the solution due to the fact that it was the lowest price. 

For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well. 

It's good for analysis.

I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers. For instance, it only checks for obvious code errors. They should work to improve this.

At that moment we needed to scan the codes that the developers are producing, we found out that we needed more features.

I've been using the solution for six months or so now. It's been less than a year.

The former product we used was Twistlock.

I haven't had much experience with the initial setup. I can't speak to what the deployment or setup was like.

The pricing is very good.

We're currently looking into other options.

We're either looking for an integrated product for the whole CICB pipeline, such as StackRox, or we're looking at Fishman from Palo Alto. We're also looking at individual products for the whole CICB pipeline. In fact, this afternoon we are having a meeting to further discuss what tools we will use, or what can we use for dependency decks in the whole CICB pipeline, and for us to get a container image.

We're a customer and an end-user of the product. We don't have a business relationship with them. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

I'd advise potential users to first check all the features to see if what they need is there and then check them off to ensure that SonarCloud fills all your needs.

It's a good product for its purpose.

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