We performed a comparison between Kiuwan 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."The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"I've found the reporting features the most helpful."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"It helps me to detect vulnerabilities."
"With the pipeline scanner, it's easier for developers to scan their products, as they don't have to export anything from their computers. They can do everything with the command line on their computer."
"We like the fact that all the issues are identified and that Veracode provides sufficient information on how to resolve them."
"The solution can scan old databases and old code written 20 years back."
"In terms of secure development, the SAST scan is very useful because we are able to identify security flaws in the code base itself, for the application."
"It has improved the quality of code being delivered for test and its vulnerability resolutions timeline has improved."
"I liked that I could easily find out where my errors were. Instead of going through the whole code and the scripts, it showed me where the errors were and gave me an idea of how to fix them."
"I like Veracode's API. You can put it into a simple bash script and run your own security testing from your MacBook in less than 15 minutes."
"The development-to-delivery phase."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."
"The technical support service has room for improvement."
"The current version of the application does not support testing for API."
"Veracode needs to improve its integration with other tools."
"From what we have seen of Veracode's SCA offering, it is just average."
"The only areas that I'm concerned with are some of the newer code libraries, things that we're starting to see people dabble with. They move quickly enough to get them into the Analysis Engine, so I wouldn't even say it is a complaint. It is probably the only thing I worry about: Occasionally hitting something that is built in some other obscure development model, where we either can't scan it or can't scan it very well."
"The policies you have, where you can tune the findings you get, don't allow you not to file tickets about certain findings. It will always report the findings, even if you know you're not that concerned about a library writing to a system log, for example. It will keep raising them, even though you may have a ticket about it. The integration will keep updating the ticket every time the scan runs."
"Veracode should provide more flexibility in its pricing and licensing modules so that it could be more affordable for all types of projects and not only for very active mission-critical projects."
"Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives."
Kiuwan is ranked 22nd in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Kiuwan is rated 8.6, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Kiuwan writes "Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement". 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 ". Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Snyk, Fortify on Demand and OWASP Zap, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our Kiuwan 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.
