1. leader badge
    It's comprehensive from a feature standpoint. My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous.
  2. leader badge
    One of the most valuable features is it is flexible. The features and technologies are very good. The flexibility and the roadmap have also been very good. They're at the forefront of delivering the additional capabilities that are required with cloud delivery, etc. Their ability to deliver what customers require and when they require is very important.
  3. Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, PortSwigger and others in Application Security Testing (AST). Updated: April 2021.
    476,892 professionals have used our research since 2012.
  4. leader badge
    I have found the best features to be the performance and there are a lot of additional plugins available.The solution has a great user interface.
  5. leader badge
    Its ability to perform different types of scans, keep everything in one place, and track the triage process in Fortify SSC stands out.The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation.
  6. Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden.
  7. The stability of the solution is very good.The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application.
  8. report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Testing (AST) solutions are best for your needs.
    476,892 professionals have used our research since 2012.
  9. By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time.In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs.
  10. I have had no problem with the stability of the solution.I like GitLab from the CI/CD perspective. It is much easier to set up CI/CD and then integrate with other tools.

Advice From The Community

Read answers to top Application Security Testing (AST) questions. 476,892 professionals have gotten help from our community of experts.
Rony_Sklar
Many companies wonder about whether SAST or DAST is better for application security testing. What are the relative benefits of each methodology? Is it possible to make use of both?
author avatarDan Doggendorf
User

SAST and  DAST are not mutually exclusive and should be used in conjunction with each other.  One should be used by the developers to ensure security is being addressed as they are writing the code.  The other is used for evaluating existing applications already in production to ensure they are not susceptible to any new vulnerabilities that have been discovered.  


The real question is which should have a higher priority when it comes to introducing the concepts into your application security model.  Unfortunately, there is no single answer to which comes first.  It all depends on your organizations culture, business model, and your relationships with the various impacted groups.

author avatarThomas Ryan
User

The easiest way to remember the role of each:


SCA & SAST = Am I Vulnerable
DAST & IAST = Am I Exploitable (In some cases together, they compliment SAST)
RASP & WAF = Can I Protect Myself  (Fixing the code is the primary option)

author avatarOscar Van Der Meer
Vendor

For application security you ideally need SAST, SCA and DAST. You need all three as they essentially measure different things:


SAST identifies bad coding practices that potentially could be exploited


SCA identifies known vulnerabilities in the libraries and components you are using and this is the main attack vector on applications.


DAST identifies some of the weaknesses that SAST and SCA identified, but also identifies weaknesses in the configuration. You might have the perfect application code with zero vulnerabilities, but if it is misconfigured, for instance using a default password, it still can be breached.


If you have to choose, look at SCA and then DATS first as that gives you the best bang for your buck from a risk reduction perspective

author avatarCurtis Yanko
Real User

It’s a false choice of a question but DAST exist because folks don’t trust their SAST tool. DAST is good about true positives but bad about false negatives. SAST just has a reputation for false positives but a new generation of SAST tools do a much better job.

author avatarRussell Webster
Real User

Both. They are not in competition with each other.
SAST is used for analyzing your written code for practices and patterns that are risky or vulnerable.
DAST is used @ runtime for analyzing the app for vulnerabilities as shown in other ways on the runtime memory stack, etc.
Both provide different value.

Look into RASP vs DAST vs IAST as well.

See more Application Security Testing (AST) questions »
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, PortSwigger and others in Application Security Testing (AST). Updated: April 2021.
476,892 professionals have used our research since 2012.