We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The time savings has been tremendous. We saw ROI in the first six months."
"Another feature of Veracode is that they provide e-learning, but the e-learning is not basic, rather it is quite advanced... in the e-learning you can check into best practices for developing code and how to prevent improper management of some component of the code that could lead to a vulnerability. The e-learning that Veracode provides is an extremely good tool."
"Veracode provides guidance for fixing vulnerabilities. It enables developers to write secure code from the start by pointing them to the problematic line of code, and saying, "This function/method has security vulnerabilities," then suggests alternatives to fix it. Then, we adopt their suggestions of the tool. By implementing it in the right way, we can fix the issue. For example, if the tool has found a method where it copied one piece of memory into another piece of memory in the code. The tool points to problematic methods with the vulnerability and provides ways to code it more securely. By adopting their suggestions, we are fixing this vulnerability."
"Veracode is a valuable tool in our secure SDLC process."
"In terms of secure development, the SAST scan is very useful because we are able to identify security flaws in the code base itself, for the application."
"The static scan is the feature that we use the most, as it gives us insight into our source code. We have it integrated with our continuous integration, continuous delivery system, so we can get insight quickly."
"My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"The product has issues with scanning."
"The pricing for qualified startups such as Neo4j could be improved."
"Sometimes the scans are not done quickly, but the solutions that it provides are really good. The quality is high, but the analysis is not done extremely quickly."
"One feature I would like would be more selectivity in email alerts. While I like getting these, I would like to be able to be more granular in which ones I receive."
"The solution could improve the Dynamic Analysis Security Testing(DAST)."
"The policies you have, where you can tune the findings you get, don't allow you not to file tickets about certain findings. It will always report the findings, even if you know you're not that concerned about a library writing to a system log, for example. It will keep raising them, even though you may have a ticket about it. The integration will keep updating the ticket every time the scan runs."
"The feature that allows me to read which mitigation answer was submitted, and to approve it, requires me to use do so in different screens. That makes it a little bit more complicated because I have to read and then I have to go back and make sure it falls under the same number ID number. That part is a little bit complicated from my perspective, because that's what I use the most."
"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."
"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"From a cost perspective, it seems okay, although we will probably evaluate alternatives next time it's up for renewal because for us, it's a relatively high cost, and we want to make sure that we are using our resources most appropriately."
"I don't really know about the pricing, but I'd say it's worth whatever Veracode is charging, because the solution is that good."
"The pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."
"It is very reasonably priced compared to what we were paying our previous vendor. For the same price, we are getting much more value and reducing our AppSec costs from 40 to 50 percent."
"If I compare the pricing with other software tools, then it is quite competitive. Whatever the price is, they have always given us a good discount."
"Veracode is expensive. Some of its products are expensive. I don't think it's way more expensive than its competitors. The dynamic is definitely worth it, as I think it's cheaper than the competitors. The static scan is a little bit more expensive, around 20 percent more expensive. The manual pen test is more expensive, but it is an expensive service because it's a manual pen test and we also do retests. I don't think it is way more expensive than the competitors, but it's about 15 to 20 percent more expensive."
"Veracode's price is high. I would like them to better optimize their pricing."
"Veracode is one of the more expensive solutions in the market, but it is worth the expense because of the eLearning and the security consultations; everything is included in the license."
"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"The price of this solution could be less expensive."
"The base licensing costs for the SaaS platform is about $900 USD per application, per year."
Veracode covers all your Application Security needs in one solution through a combination of five analysis types; static analysis, dynamic analysis, software composition analysis, interactive application security testing, and penetration testing. Unlike on-premise solutions that are hard to scale and focused on finding rather than fixing, Veracode comprises a unique combination of SaaS technology and on-demand expertise that enables DevSecOps through integration with your pipeline, and empowers developers to find and fix security defects.
CAST Highlight is a leading SaaS Application Portfolio Analysis platform that delivers Software Intelligence at the intersection of IT and business to accelerate and secure your digital journey. It enables enterprise leaders to track hidden risks in custom and open source software rapidly and in a non-intrusive manner.
Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time.
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
CAST Highlight is ranked 21st in Application Security with 2 reviews while Fortify Application Defender is ranked 19th in Application Security with 3 reviews. CAST Highlight is rated 7.0, while Fortify Application Defender is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CAST Highlight writes "Excellent support, works seamlessly with most languages, and useful for knowing about the readiness of the codebase for cloud migration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Straightforward to deploy and integrates well with WebInspect to secure against application-specific threats". CAST Highlight is most compared with SonarQube, WhiteSource, Coverity, Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle and Checkmarx, whereas Fortify Application Defender is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx, Coverity, Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle and Micro Focus Fortify on Demand. See our CAST Highlight vs. Fortify Application Defender report.
See our list of best Application Security vendors.
We monitor all Application Security 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.