We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and GitHub Advanced Security 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."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"The solution has good performance, it is able to compute in 10 to 15 minutes."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the SCA module and the code-checking module. Additionally, the solutions are explanatory and helpful."
"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need."
"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"I would like the product to include more debugging and developed tools. It needs to also add enhancements on the coding side."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"They should make it more container-friendly and optimized for the CI pipeline. They should make it a little less heavy. Right now, it requires a SQL database, and the way the tool works is that it has an engine and then it has an analysis database in which it stores the information. So, it is pretty heavy from that perspective because you have to have a full SQL Server. They're working on something called Checkmarx Light, which is a slim-down version. They haven't released it yet, but that's what we need. There should be something a little more slimmed down that can just run the analysis and output the results in a format that's readable as opposed to having a full, really big, and thick deployment with a full database server."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"It is an expensive solution."
"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
"There could be DST features included in the product."
"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."
"The report limitations are the main issue."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while GitHub Advanced Security is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 6 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while GitHub Advanced Security is rated 9.0. 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 GitHub Advanced Security writes "A tool that provides ease of integration with the set of existing codes in an infrastructure". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas GitHub Advanced Security is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode, Fortify on Demand and GitLab. See our Checkmarx One vs. GitHub Advanced Security report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
