We performed a comparison between PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and SonarQube 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."The tool provides complimentary services. It allows you to add a lot of extensions, and you can get extensions quite often. It is quite a flexible application."
"Enables automation of different tasks such as authorization testing."
"I personally love its capability to automatically and accurately detect vulnerabilities. So, I would say it is the Burp scanner that is THE most powerful, valuable, and an awesome feature."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"I have found this solution has more plugins than other competitors which is a benefit. You are able to attach different plugins to the security scan to add features. For example, you can check to see if there are any payment systems that exist on a server, or username and password brute force analysis."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has an intercept tab that helps us to scan our APIs, set the response, and request errors."
"The solution is quite helpful for session management and configuration."
"It helps in API testing, where manual intervention was previously necessary for each payload."
"The reporting and the results are quick. It gets integrated within the pipeline well."
"Some of the most valuable features have been the latest up-to-date of the OWASP, the monitoring, the reporting, and the ease of use with the IDE plugins, in terms of integration."
"SonarQube is good in terms of code review and to report on basic vulnerabilities in your applications."
"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."
"Engineers have also learned from the results and have improved themselves as engineers. This will help them with their careers."
"It is an easy tool that you can deploy and configure. After that you can measure the history of your obligation and integrate it with other tools like GitLab or GitHub or Azure DevOps to do quality code analysis."
"The SonarQube dashboard looks great."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"The Burp Collaborator needs improvement. There also needs to be improved integration."
"It would be good if the solution could give us more details about what exactly is defective."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
"There needs to be better documentation provided. Currently, we need to buy books, or we need to review online some use cases from other professionals who have been using the solution to find out their experience. It is not easy to find out how to properly do a security assessment."
"A lot of our interns find it difficult to get used to PortSwigger Burp's environment."
"The scanner and crawler need to be improved."
"We'd like to have more integration potential across all versions of the product."
"We did have some trouble with the LDAP integration for the console."
"Although it has Sonar built into it, it is still lacking. Customization features of identifying a particular attack still need to be worked on. To give you an example: if we want to scan and do a false positive analysis, those types of features are missing. If we want to rescan something from a particular point that is a feature that is also missing. It’s in our queue. That will hopefully save a lot of time."
"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."
"I would also like SonarQube to be able to write custom scanning rules. More documentation would be helpful as well because some of our guys were struggling with the customization script."
"The scanning part could be improved in SonarQube. We have used Coverity for scanning, and we have the critical issues reported by Coverity. When we used SonarQube for scanning and looked at the results, it seems that some of them have incorrect input. This part can be improved for C and C++ languages."
"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."
"A better design of the interface and add some new rules."
"I am not very pleased with the technical debt computation."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 112 reviews. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and GitHub Advanced Security. See our PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
