We performed a comparison between Klocwork 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 Incremental analysis."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The most valuable feature of Klocwork is finding defects while you're doing the coding. For example, if you have an IDE plug-in of Klocwork on Visual Studio or Eclipse, you can find the faults; similar to using spell check on Word, you can find out defects during the development phase, which means that you don't have to wait till the development is over to find the flaws and address the deficiencies. I also find language support in Klocwork good because it used to support only C, C++, C#, and Java, but now, it also supports Java scripts and Python."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"Veracode creates a list of issues. You can go through them one by one and click through to a new window with all the information about the issue discovered."
"It's comprehensive from a feature standpoint."
"Static Scanning is the most valuable feature of Veracode."
"The feature I like most in Veracode is that it clearly specifies the line in the entire file where a vulnerability is found."
"The user interface is quick, familiar, and user-friendly and makes navigation to other software very easy."
"Veracode is a valuable tool in our secure SDLC process."
"When we do have errors, Veracode is always available, their consultants, to help us either mitigate the error, or provide technical assistance on pointing exactly where the problem is and how we could probably fix it. I'm always amazed at how knowledgeable they are."
"It scans for the OWASP top-10 security flaws at the dynamic level and, at the static level, it scans for all the warnings so that developers can fix the code before we go to UAT or the next phase."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."
"Under NIST cybersecurity standards, we must address vulnerabilities within a specified time after discovering them. When we try to propagate those updates and fixes through the system, it would be nice if the clients could reconnect to the existing server or have the server dynamically updated in some way. I know that isn't easy, but maybe processes could be enhanced to make that more streamlined from a DevOps perspective."
"Modern languages, such as Angular and .NET, should be included as a part of Klocwork. They have recently added Kotlin as a part of their project, but we would like to see more languages in Klocwork. That's the reason we are using Coverity as a backup for some of the other languages."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"It needs better APIs, reporting that I can easily query through the APIs and, preferably, a license model that I can predict."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"I've seen slightly better static analysis tools from other companies when it comes to speed and ease of use."
"It would be ideal if it was able to demonstrate higher levels of cybersecurity certifications like becoming FedRAMP compliant or working in those areas."
"The scanning could be improved, because some scans take a bit of time."
"They cover a lot of languages already and it doesn't make sense for them to cover legacy languages but I know there is a need for covering legacy languages."
"Veracode can be slow at times and has room for improvement, which may cause delays in our products and prolonged static scans."
"I would like Veracode to add more language support."
Klocwork is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Klocwork is rated 8.2, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". 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 ". Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and OWASP Zap. See our Klocwork vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors, best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors, and best Static Code Analysis 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.
