We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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 identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"It is very useful because it fits our requirements. It is also easy to use. It is not complex, and we are satisfied with the results."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"The administration in Checkmarx is very good."
"One of the most valuable features is it is flexible."
"The only thing I like is that Checkmarx does not need to compile."
"It offers very good accuracy. You can trust the results."
"The most valuable feature is the application security. It also has a reasonable price."
"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 intercepting feature is the most valuable."
"The extension that it provides with the community version for the skills mapping is excellent."
"The feature that we have found most valuable is that it comes with pre-set configurations. They have a set of predefined options where you can pick one and start scanning. We also have the option of creating our own configurations, like how often do the applications need to be scanned."
"The active scanner, which does an automated search of any web vulnerabilities."
"The initial setup is simple."
"I expect application security vendors to cover all aspects of application security, including SAST, DAST, and even mobile application security testing. And it would be much better if they provided an on-premises and cloud option for all these main application security features."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"We would like to be able to run scans from our local system, rather than having to always connect to the product server, which is a longer process."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"I would like to see the DAST solution in the future."
"Checkmarx is not good because it has too many false positive issues."
"Meta data is always needed."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"The number of false positives need to be reduced on the solution."
"The solution is not easy to set it up. You need a lot of knowledge."
"I need the solution to be more user-friendly. The solution needs to be user-friendly."
"The solution doesn't offer very good scalability."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
"I would like to see the return of the spider mechanism instead of the crawling feature. Burp Suite's earlier version 1.7 had an excellent spider option, and it would be beneficial if Burp incorporated those features into the current version. The crawling techniques used in the current version are not as efficient as those used in earlier versions."
"It should provide a better way to integrate with Jenkins so that DAST (dynamic application security testing) can be automated."
"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 54 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, 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". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Rapid7 InsightAppSec. See our Checkmarx One vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
