We performed a comparison between SonarQube and Synopsys Defensics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."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."
"The good thing with SonarQube is it covers a lot of issues, it's a very robust framework."
"The most valuable feature of SonarQube I have found to be the configuration that has allowed us to can make adjusts to the demands of the code review. It gives a specified classification regarding the skill, prioritization, and it is easy for me to review and make my code."
"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."
"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)."
"I follow Quality Gate's graduation model within organization, and it is extremely helpful for me to benchmark products."
"It has very good scalability and stability."
"It automatically scans for code, detects vulnerabilities, and generates daily reports."
"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."
"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."
"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."
"I find it is light on the security side."
"There are times that we have the database crash. However, this might be an issue with how we have configured it and not a software issue. Apart from this, I do not see any issues with the solution."
"Having performance regression would be a helpful add on or ability to be able to do during the scan."
"In terms of analysis and findings, other tools provide more in-depth insights and detailed steps to mitigate or handle issues."
"Expression of common vulnerabilities and exposures is not always current."
"It would be a great add-on if SonarQube could update its database for vulnerabilities or plugging parts."
"We found a solution with dynamic testing, and are looking to find a solution that can be used for both types of testing."
"The solution could improve the management reports by making them easier to understand for the technical team that needs to review them."
"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."
Earn 20 points
SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 112 reviews while Synopsys Defensics is ranked 5th in Fuzz Testing Tools. SonarQube is rated 8.0, while Synopsys Defensics is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Synopsys Defensics writes "Technical support provided protocol-specific documentation to prove that some positives were not false". SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and GitHub Advanced Security, whereas Synopsys Defensics is most compared with Snyk, Fortify on Demand, Invicti, HCL AppScan and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional.
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.
