We performed a comparison between PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Veracode 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."Once I capture the proxy, I'm able to transfer across. All the requested information is there. I can send across the request to what we call a repeater, where I get to ready the payload that I send to the application. Put in malicious content and then see if it's responding to it."
"The solution has a pretty simple setup."
"There is no other tool like it. I like the intuitiveness and the plugins that are available."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the advanced features, user-friendly interface, and integration with other tools."
"It was easy to learn."
"The suite testing models are very good. It's very secure."
"The integration with DevOps pipelines is seamless."
"Veracode is a cloud-based platform, where they manage all the back-end, and they do a lot of analysis during the scans, and they do a lot of post-scan reconciliation."
"Integrations into our developer's IDE (Greenlight) and the DevOps Pipeline SAST / SourceClear Integrations has particularly increased our time to market and confidence."
"Another feature of Veracode is that they provide e-learning, but the e-learning is not basic, rather it is quite advanced... in the e-learning you can check into best practices for developing code and how to prevent improper management of some component of the code that could lead to a vulnerability. The e-learning that Veracode provides is an extremely good tool."
"It gives feedback to developers on the effectiveness of their secure coding practices."
"It's not "one policy fits all." I really like that Veracode allows me to set up specific policies that I can apply to applications."
"I like Veracode's ease of integration with various cloud platforms and tools."
"Vericode's policy reporting for ensuring compliance with industry standards and regulations is great. I"
"I need the solution to be more user-friendly. The solution needs to be user-friendly."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"I would like to see a more optimized solution, as it currently uses a lot of CPU power and memory."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional can improve by having more features in the free version for beginners to try."
"The Initial setup is a bit complex."
"If we're running a huge number of scans regularly, it slows down the tool."
"The number of false positives need to be reduced on the solution."
"A lot of our interns find it difficult to get used to PortSwigger Burp's environment."
"The language version support could be improved."
"Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them."
"While Veracode is way ahead of its competitors on Gartner Magic Quadrant, it's a bit more expensive than Fortify. It's a good solution for the cost, but if we had a high budget, we would go with Checkmarx, which is much better than Veracode."
"An area for improvement in Veracode is the time that it takes to scan large projects, as that makes it difficult to fit into our CI/CD pipelines."
"The support team could be more responsive, and the dependency of users on the support team is too high and should be reduced."
"Veracode needs to improve its integration with other tools."
"There should be more APIs, especially in SCA, to get some results or automate some things."
"Sometimes Veracode gives us results about small glitches in the necessary packages. For example, we recently found issues with Veracode's native libraries for .NET 6 that were fixed in the next versions of those libraries. But sometimes you do not know which version of the library particular components are using. The downside of that is that one day, the solution found some issues in that library for the necessary package we spent. Another day, it found the same issues with another library. It will clearly state that this is the same stuff you've already analyzed. This creates some additional work, but it isn't significant. However, sometimes you see the same issue for two or three days in a row."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6, while Veracode is rated 8.2. 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 Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Rapid7 InsightAppSec, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Veracode 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.
