What is our primary use case?
Our primary use case of this solution is for static and dynamic analysis along with the source gear for the third party dependency (not IDM).
We were looking into actually moving towards IDM, but that's the extent of my knowledge. They are licensed as two separate products. They're part of the same platform, but they are licensed separately.
We have Veracode, Veracode Developer Training, Veracode Software Composition Analysis, and SourceClear. SourceClear and SDA are pretty much the same. They just support different languages. Veracode as a whole, the top option, is the one that includes everything.
How has it helped my organization?
We are using the Veracode tools to expose the engineers to the security vulnerabilities that were introduced with the new features, i.e. a lot faster or sooner in the development life cycle. We rely on this set of tools to automatically scan our artifacts when they are moving to different environments.
We got it to the point that when we were promoting the artifacts from desktop to the server environment, we already had the scans completed. We knew the vulnerabilities that we were introducing with the new features ahead of time, i.e. before the QA department was finding them. That was the main reason we decided to use Veracode or to use tools for static analysis and dynamic analysis.
What is most valuable?
With Veracode, it's not about features for us. It is about the pricing model that they offer. To be honest, with their vulnerability database, the total amount of false positives that we're getting is very low.
That's the main reason we use Veracode over anybody else. New Veracode features could include a very big database of actual vulnerabilities to be better than other products.
What needs improvement?
Veracode owns SourceClear. They bought them in 2017 or 2018, and they still are not fully integrated with the actual Veracode dashboards. Right now, you have to use two separate tools from the same company. One for the static analysis and dynamic analysis, then the second one for the third-party dependency.
That is an area that they need to improve the service. Veracode needs to bring the second tool in already to the dashboard so that we don't have to use two separate logins. We don't want two different sets of jobs that we have to upload into two different places, etc. Veracode also needs better integration of their tools to each other.
Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis. The SDA feature is on the website. Veracode should integrate SourceClear with the company product line finally after two years. I would love to see that.
Veracode did not previously support Python 3. They just released the support for Python 3. Keeping updates coming quicker would be the main thing that I would love to see, i.e. to have all these solutions better integrated.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using Veracode as a solution for almost two years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's a very stable solution.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability is the main issue with Veracode. For my company, the outlier is out there, but when it comes to scalability, we had issues with automatically scanning springboard artifacts. If you scan the artifacts, they want the artifacts to be packaged in a specific way. This is very well documented on the website but it's not the way we're doing business.
The workaround was taking the build that was getting put together by Jenkins and moved through the environment. We had to make a separate one, packaged differently just for the tools to work. For the scans to work, if that makes sense. Maybe we are just weird in the way we package our artifacts but maybe many are having the same issue.
We have about 200 engineers that have user roles in the solution. There are different roles. We have security administrators. We have team leads. We have managers. Their roles are all very well put together. Each team has a manager that has access to more features than the rest of his team. They can create things, delete things, compared to the regular guys that can only see the reports. It's very well structured, from that standpoint.
Theoretically, everything is integrated with Jenkins, so the staff depends from one application to another, i.e. three people or eight people from our side. From their end, in our pricing model, we have access directly to an account manager. They have a team of engineers that usually help us if we encounter any issues. It's very extensive in use. We have about 80 services and applications going through using the scanning solutions that Veracode has and we are scaling up.
How are customer service and technical support?
The solution's technical support is absolutely fantastic and very fast. Veracode has very fast resolution and response times. Usually, when we have an issue, it's only a few hours before we get an answer from them.
Another time, the Veracode integration wasn't working and in about 3 days we came up with a solution to our problem. At the high level, the beginning of the conversation with Veracode tech support is pretty fast. It's only a few hours.
Coming up with a solution takes two to three days at the most with Veracode. We pay a lot of money for that. You get what you pay for.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We never did use other products. The reason we started looking into IBM and WhiteSource was because of the hiccups or the speed bumps we were encountering with our springboard artifacts. We were in the process of evaluating other products and I think it's still a valid option. I wouldn't advertise it, but we were in the process of changing from Veracode just because of that one particular issue.
We had to build our artifacts differently than before just to scan them, i.e. instead of scanning the ones we were publishing. It's not a big deal overall, but it would be nice for the solution to work out of the box with everything that's out there. Instead, many companies are changing the way they're doing business just for this small little step in the delivery process.
How was the initial setup?
I was not involved with the initial setup. When we were uploading new applications to their solutions it was very straightforward. Their documentation is really good and very detailed.
In the worst case scenario, if the implementation engineer just runs through the material, you can go on the website for resources. The way they have everything documented is very good. Veracode is very well documented.
What was our ROI?
I do not have any information on ROI. We became better from an engineering standpoint, but I don't know if we saved a ton of money in the process.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works.
We are in negotiations with Veracode. The old model was about $500 for dynamic analysis and about $4500 for the static analysis, per app or service, per year.
Veracode offers a lot of other license options that you can put on top of what we just discussed, but I don't think we ever looked into any of those. The way we implemented it was very straightforward. You have your app and you pay this much for both dynamic and static licensing. That's all we cared about per year.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We looked at IBM before we decided to go with Veracode. I've seen the documentation that our director of information security put together.
We looked at six different solutions before we went with Veracode. Another company does their pricing model based on lines of code. WhiteSource was one other option we evaluated.
We did review a few of them. IBM App Scan and WhiteSource were definitely on the list. I don't remember the rest of them.
What other advice do I have?
If the springboard issue doesn't hold them back and the pricing model stays the same as the one that we have right now for this year with them, it's a good deal. Veracode is pretty straightforward to use and the support is really good. We don't have a lot of complaints about that.
I don't know how the pricing model is going to change the actual price of the application. On a per license basis, Veracode has a very lucrative way of doing business. I don't think a big company that has a lot of services and applications would enjoy paying upwards of $200,000 per year to scan all their code.
Prospective customers should look at how the pricing model affects them, especially if they are in the microservice type of architecture or if they are moving towards something like that.
I would rate Veracode an eight out of ten just based on the experience that we had the past two years. The reason it's not ten is because of the ways these tools integrate.
That rating is at risk of becoming a seven now with the pricing model changing. Veracode is probably not going to be that attractive anymore compared to other competitors. We knew other competitors were more expensive. The reason that we didn't go with them was that Veracode was very straightforward.
Keep your software secure
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.