CAST Highlight vs Sonatype Lifecycle comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
CAST Logo
444 views|322 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Sonatype Logo
6,172 views|3,384 comparisons
89% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CAST Highlight and Sonatype Lifecycle based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed CAST Highlight vs. Sonatype Lifecycle Report (Updated: March 2024).
770,141 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"It offers good performance.""The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed.""CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard.""The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with.""The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."

More CAST Highlight Pros →

"The most valuable function of Sonatype Lifecycle is its code analysis capability, especially within the specific sub-product focusing on static analysis.""You can really see what's happening after you've developed something.""Sonatype support is quite responsive. When we needed something, we could reach out and set up a meeting. They provide the best support possible.""Its engine itself is most valuable in terms of the way it calculates and decides whether a security vulnerability exists or not. That's the most important thing. Its security is also pretty good, and its listing about the severities is also good.""What's really nice about that is it shows a graph of all the versions for that particular component, and it marks out the ones that have a vulnerability and the ones that don't have a vulnerability.""The data quality is really good. They've got some of the best in the industry as far as that is concerned. As a result, it helps us to resolve problems faster. The visibility of the data, as well as their features that allow us to query and search - and even use it in the development IDE - allow us to remediate and find things faster.""There is a feature called Continuous Monitoring. As time goes on we'll be able to know whether a platform is still secure or not because of this feature.""It's online, which means if a change is made to the Nexus database today, or within the hour, my developers will benefit instantly. The security features are discovered continuously. So if Nexus finds out that a library is no longer safe, they just have to flag it and, automatically, my developers will know."

More Sonatype Lifecycle Pros →

Cons
"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user.""The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight.""Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time.""CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves.""There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."

More CAST Highlight Cons →

"It can be tricky if you want to exclude some files from scanning. For instance, if you do not want to scan and push testing files to Fortify Software Security Center, that is tricky with some IDEs, such as IntelliJ. We found that there is an Exclude feature that is not working. We reported that to them for future fixing. It needs some work on the plugins to make them consistent across IDEs and make them easier.""The biggest thing that I have run into, which there are ways around, is being able to easily access the auditing data from a third-party tool; being able to pull all of that into one place in a cohesive manner where you can report off of that. We've had a little bit of a challenge with that. There are a number of things available to work with, to help with that in the tool, but we just haven't explored them yet.""The reporting capability is good but I wish it was better. I sent the request to support and they raised it as an enhancement within the system. An example is filtering by version. If I have a framework that is used in all applications, but version 1 is used in 50 percent of them and version 2 in 25 percent, they will show as different libraries with different usage. But in reality, they're all using one framework.""It's the right kind of tool and going in the right direction, but it really needs to be more code-driven and oriented to be scaled at the developer level.""The generation of false positives should be reduced.""If they had a more comprehensive online tutorial base, both for admin and developers, that would help. It would be good if they actually ran through some scenarios, regarding what happens if I do pick up a vulnerability. How do I fork out into the various decisions? If the vulnerability is not of a severe nature, can I just go ahead with it until it becomes severe? This is important because, obviously, business demands certain deliverables to be ready at a certain time.""We had some issues, and I think we might still have some issues, where the Sonatype Nexus Repository has integrations with IQ and SonarQube. We're getting some errors on the UI, so we've had Sonatype look into that a little bit.""Some of the APIs are just REST APIs and I would like to see more of the functionality in the plugin side of the world. For example, with the RESTful API I can actually delete or move an artifact from one Nexus repository to another. I can't do that with the pipeline API, as of yet. I'd like to see a bit more functionality on that side."

More Sonatype Lifecycle Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive. The high price is part of the problem with the CAST solutions."
  • "It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
  • "Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
  • "CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
  • More CAST Highlight Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Its pricing is competitive within the market. It's not very cheap, it's not very expensive."
  • "We're pretty happy with the price, for what it is delivering for us and the value we're getting from it."
  • "Pricing is comparable with some of the other products. We are happy with the pricing."
  • "The price is good. We certainly get a lot more in return. However, it's also hard to get the funds to roll out such a product for the entire firm. Therefore, pricing has been a limiting factor for us. However, it's a fair price."
  • "The license fee may be a bit harder for startups to justify. But it will save you a headache later as well as peace of mind. Additionally, it shows your own customers that you value security stuff and will protect yourselves from any licensing issues, which is good marketing too."
  • "In addition to the license fee for IQ Server, you have to factor in some running costs. We use AWS, so we spun up an additional VM to run this. If the database is RDS that adds a little bit extra too. Of course someone could run it on a pre-existing VM or physical server to reduce costs. I should add that compared to the license fee, the running costs are so minimal they had no effect on our decision to use IQ Server."
  • "Pricing is decent. It's not horrible. It's middle-of-the-road, as far as our ranking goes. They're a little bit more but that's also because they provide more."
  • "Lifecycle, to the best of my recollection, had the best pricing compared with other solutions."
  • More Sonatype Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
    770,141 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed.
    Top Answer:CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten.
    Top Answer:The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight.
    Top Answer:We like the data that Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle consistently delivers. This solution helps us in fixing and understanding the issues a lot quicker. The policy engine allows you to set up different… more »
    Top Answer:Fortify integrates with various development environments and tools, such as IDEs (Integrated Development Environments) and CI/CD pipelines.
    Top Answer:I would rate the affordability of the solution as an eight out of ten.
    Ranking
    Views
    444
    Comparisons
    322
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    567
    Rating
    7.8
    Views
    6,172
    Comparisons
    3,384
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    1,112
    Rating
    8.1
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle, Nexus Lifecycle
    Learn More
    Overview

    CAST Highlight is a SaaS software intelligence product for performing rapid application portfolio analysis. It automatically analyzes source code of hundreds of applications in a week for Cloud Readiness, Software Composition Analysis (Open Source risks), Resiliency, and Technical Debt. Objective software insights from automated source code analysis combined with built-in qualitative surveys for business context enable more informed decision-making about application portfolios.

    CAST is the software intelligence category leader. CAST technology can see inside custom applications with MRI-like precision, automatically generating intelligence about their inner workings - composition, architecture, transaction flows, cloud readiness, structural flaws, legal and security risks. It’s becoming essential for faster modernization for cloud, raising the speed and efficiency of Software Engineering, better open source risk control, and accurate technical due diligence. CAST operates globally with offices in North America, Europe, India, China. Visit www.castsoftware.com.

    Sonatype Lifecycle is an open-source security and dependency management software that uses only one tool to automatically find open-source vulnerabilities at every stage of the System Development Life Cycle (SDLC). Users can now minimize security vulnerabilities, permitting organizations to enhance development workflow. Sonatype Lifecycle gives the user complete control over their software supply chain, allowing them to regain wasted time fighting risks in the SDLC. In addition, this software unifies the ability to define rules, actions, and policies that work best for your organizations and teams.

    Sonatype Lifecycle allows users to help their teams discover threats before an attack has the chance to take place by examining a database of known vulnerabilities. With continuous monitoring at every stage of the development life cycle, Sonatype Lifecycle enables teams to build secure software. The solution allows users to utilize a complete automated solution within their existing workflows. Once a potential threat is identified, the solution’s policies will automatically rectify it.

    Benefits of Open-source Security Monitoring

    As cybersecurity attacks are on the rise, organizations are at constant risk for data breaches. Managing your software supply chain gets trickier as your organization grows, leaving many vulnerabilities exposed. With easily accessible source code that can be modified and shared freely, open-source monitoring gives users complete transparency. A community of professionals can inspect open-source code to ensure fewer bugs, and any open-source dependency vulnerability will be detected and fixed rapidly. Users can use open-source security monitoring to avoid attacks through automatic detection of potential threats and rectification immediately and automatically.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Sonatype Lifecycle software receives high praise from users for many reasons. Among them are the abilities to identify and rectify vulnerabilities at every stage of the SDLC, help with open-source governance, and minimize risk.

    Michael E., senior enterprise architect at MIB Group, says "Some of the more profound features include the REST APIs. We tend to make use of those a lot. They also have a plugin for our CI/CD.”

    R.S., senior architect at a insurance company, notes “Specifically features that have been good include:

    • the email notifications
    • the API, which has been good to work with for reporting, because we have some downstream reporting requirements
    • that it's been really user-friendly to work with.”

    "Its engine itself is most valuable in terms of the way it calculates and decides whether a security vulnerability exists or not. That's the most important thing. Its security is also pretty good, and its listing about the severities is also good," says Subham S., engineering tools and platform manager at BT - British Telecom.

    Sample Customers
    Wells Fargo, Bank of NY Mellon, Northern Trust, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, BMW, AT&T, US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, John Hancock, Marsh & McLennan, Ernst & Young, PwC, Volkswagen, Boston Consulting Group, London Stock Exchange, Telefonica, Saur France, Total Energies France, SNCF
    Genome.One, Blackboard, Crediterform, Crosskey, Intuit, Progress Software, Qualys, Liberty Mutual Insurance
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Insurance Company10%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Insurance Company11%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm33%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Government9%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise74%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise57%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    CAST Highlight vs. Sonatype Lifecycle
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about CAST Highlight vs. Sonatype Lifecycle and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    770,141 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    CAST Highlight is ranked 10th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 5 reviews while Sonatype Lifecycle is ranked 5th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 42 reviews. CAST Highlight is rated 7.8, while Sonatype Lifecycle is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CAST Highlight writes "Easy to set up with optimized and automated insights". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sonatype Lifecycle writes "Seamless to integrate and identify vulnerabilities and frees up staff time". CAST Highlight is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode, Checkmarx One and Coverity, whereas Sonatype Lifecycle is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, GitLab and Checkmarx One. See our CAST Highlight vs. Sonatype Lifecycle report.

    See our list of best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.

    We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.