We performed a comparison between GitHub and Sonatype Lifecycle based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."GitHub is pure or open-source; you can access it anywhere. You can have a lot of collateral information. You can make the changes and do the reviews from one place."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it can support you for most of the road map and it can automate some tasks which works really well with collaboration with the teams. They are really interested in how they organize the history of the code itself which is good."
"The initial setup was easy."
"I find the most valuable collaboration between our peers to be a seamless collaboration between our peers. We can connect and change our code, allowing us to be agile in our projects. Since we're talking about DevOps, we're using Jenkins in our pipeline. It helps speed up the process by automating the DevOps workflow."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution has been stable for us."
"The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code."
"The product has a very user-friendly interface and user-friendly security."
"Fortify integrates with various development environments and tools, such as IDEs (Integrated Development Environments) and CI/CD pipelines."
"Among its valuable features, it's easy to handle and easy configure, it's user-friendly, and it's easy to map and integrate."
"The integration of Lifecycle is really good with Jenkins and GitHub; those work very well. We've been able to get it to work seamlessly with them so that it runs on every build that we have."
"With the plugin for our IDE that Sonatype provides, we can check whether a library has security, quality, or licensing issues very easily. Which is nice because Googling for this stuff can be a bit cumbersome. By checking it before code is even committed, we save ourselves from getting notifications."
"The report part is quite easy to read. The report part is very important to us because that is how we communicate to our security officer and the security committee. Therefore, we need to have a complete report that we can generate and pass onto them for review."
"When developers are consuming open-source libraries from the internet, it's able to automatically block the ones that are insecure. And it has the ability to make suggestions on the ones they should be using instead."
"The dashboard is usable and gives us clear visibility into what is happening. It also has a very cool feature, which allows us to see the clean version available to be downloaded. Therefore, it is very easy to go and trace which version of the component does not have any issues. The dashboard can be practical, as well. It can wave a particular version of a Java file or component. It can even grandfather certain components, because in a real world scenarios we cannot always take the time to go and update something because it's not backward compatible. Having these features make it a lot easier to use and more practical. It allows us to apply the security, without having an all or nothing approach."
"Its engine itself is most valuable in terms of the way it calculates and decides whether a security vulnerability exists or not. That's the most important thing. Its security is also pretty good, and its listing about the severities is also good."
"Could be more user friendly."
"GitHub could add more security features. I am not sure how secure it is. If they provide more security features, then it can be used in more official applications."
"The stability can be improved."
"It would be better if the amount of storage were increased."
"The solution can improve by adding video guides, official guides, or short courses that cater to beginners who are new to the system. These resources could offer step-by-step guidance on how to use GitHub, including common procedures such as pulling and committing. Currently, many of us have to resort to searching for information on how to do these tasks via Google. An official guide provided by GitHub itself would be a valuable asset to newcomers and would save them time and effort."
"This solution could be improved by offering crowd sourced support where we could ask questions to other users."
"The security point should be addressed in the next release and scaling is also an issue."
"If you are uploading or cloning a large file, with more than 25 megs, it's pretty slow."
"There is room for improvement in the code analysis aspect of Sonatype Lifecycle, specifically in the area of deployment security."
"Some of the APIs are just REST APIs and I would like to see more of the functionality in the plugin side of the world. For example, with the RESTful API I can actually delete or move an artifact from one Nexus repository to another. I can't do that with the pipeline API, as of yet. I'd like to see a bit more functionality on that side."
"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."
"The reporting could be better."
"One area of improvement, about which I have spoken to the Sonatype architect a while ago, is related to the installation. We still have an installation on Linux machines. The installation should move to EKS or Kubernetes so that we can do rollover updates, and we don't have to take the service down. My primary focus is to have at least triple line availability of my tools, which gives me a very small window to update my tools, including IQ. Not having them on Kubernetes means that every time we are performing an upgrade, there is downtime. It impacts the 0.1% allocated downtime that we are allowed to have, which becomes a challenge. So, if there is Kubernetes installation, it would be much easier. That's one thing that definitely needs to be improved."
"Not all languages are supported in Fortify."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer has a bit of a learning curve, and I don't find it particularly helpful in narrowing down the vulnerabilities we should prioritize."
"The GUI is simple, so it's easy to use. It started as great to use, but for larger scale companies, it also comes with some limitations. This is why we tried to move to more of an API approach. So, the GUI could use some improvements potentially."
GitHub is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 74 reviews while Sonatype Lifecycle is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 43 reviews. GitHub is rated 8.6, while Sonatype Lifecycle is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sonatype Lifecycle writes "Seamless to integrate and identify vulnerabilities and frees up staff time". GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Fortify on Demand, Bitbucket and Atlassian SourceTree, whereas Sonatype Lifecycle is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, GitLab and Checkmarx One. See our GitHub vs. Sonatype Lifecycle report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security 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.
