We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning 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."We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."
"The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for."
"Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"The ability to track the vulnerabilities inside the code (origin and destination of weak variables or functions)."
"The most valuable features of Tenable.io Web Application Scanning are the integration into specific use cases and scanning. All of the features of the solution are useful."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which provides a good level of detail with respect to vulnerabilities."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is very easy to use."
"We use the tool for our websites. We have a vulnerable subdomain. The tool helps to scan it for vulnerabilities."
"Our customers adopt this solution because of the replication testing and the vulnerability assessment it can do. It is a multi-faceted product."
"All the features are valuable to us as they offer cutting-edge scanning methods and address the latest issues with a contemporary approach. Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is highly stable. I rate it a nine out ten. Since the solution works on the Cloud, it's highly scalable. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. The setup of the solution is straightforward. The Return on Investment is substantial. I recommend the solution to all."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"The cost per user is high and should be reduced."
"There is nothing particular that I don't like in this solution. It can have more integrations, but the integrations that we would like are in the roadmap anyway, and they just need to deliver the roadmap. What I like about the roadmap is that it is going where it needs to go. If I were to look at the roadmap, there is nothing that is jumping out there that says to me, "Yeah. I'd like something else on the roadmap." What they're looking to deliver is what I would expect and forecast them to deliver."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"The platform's technical support services could be better."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is not very user-friendly and you need a lot of information to get proper reports. The tool's support is not very responsive."
"It isn't easy to manage vulnerabilities in Tenable."
"I would like for them to add proxy filtering, where you can transfer and alter the package. It is fully automated. Other web application testers programs are actually proxy software, and the proxy software gives you the flexibility of modifying the outgoing package, which will actually help you in exploiting any vulnerability in detail."
"The cloud and the on-premises versions have their own controllers, and there is no way to centrally manage controllers."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning could improve by offering faster fuzzing."
"The report customization needs to be better."
"The technical support should be improved. Currently, some attacks are detected while others are not."
More Tenable.io Web Application Scanning Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is ranked 24th in Application Security Tools with 14 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is rated 7.6. 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 Tenable.io Web Application Scanning writes "Highly Recommended Solution with Latest Scanning Methods". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is most compared with Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify on Demand and SonarQube. See our Checkmarx One vs. Tenable.io Web Application Scanning 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.