Most Helpful Review
Researched Checkmarx but chose Veracode: All-encompassing tool that scans for vulnerabilities and security breaches
Researched HCL AppScan but chose Checkmarx: Works well with Windows servers but no Linux support and takes too long to scan files
Researched Checkmarx but chose HCL AppScan: Offers many support languages, scans in a decent amount of time and is easy to set up
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"The most valuable feature comes from the fact that it is cloud-based, and I can scale up without having to worry about any other infrastructure needs."
"I have used this solution in multiple projects for vulnerability testing and finding security leaks within the code."
"We used it for performing security checks. We have many Java applications and Android applications. Essentially it was used for checking the security validations for compliance purposes."
"Veracode is a valuable tool in our secure SDLC process."
"Integrations into our developer's IDE (Greenlight) and the DevOps Pipeline SAST / SourceClear Integrations has particularly increased our time to market and confidence."
"The source composition analysis component is great because it gives our developers some comfort in using new libraries."
"Veracode's cloud-based approach, coupled with the appliance that lets us use Veracode to scan internal-only web applications, has provided a seamless, always-up-to-date application security scanning solution."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the Best Fix Location and the Payments option because you can save a lot of time trying to mitigate the configuration. Using these tools can save you a lot of time."
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"Overall, the ability to find vulnerabilities in the code is better than the tool that we were using before."
"The most valuable features are the easy to understand interface, and it 's very user-friendly."
"The solution is always updating to continuously add items that create a level of safety from vulnerabilities. It's one of the key features they provide that's an excellent selling point. They're always ahead of the game when it comes to finding any vulnerabilities within the database."
"The user interface is excellent. It's very user friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"This solution saves us time due to the low number of false positives detected."
"It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis."
"I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages."
"Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them."
"One of the things that we have from a reporting point of view, is that we would love to see a graphical report. If you look through a report for something that has come back from Veracode, it takes a whole lot of time to just go through all the pages of the code to figure out exactly what it says. We know certain areas don’t have the greatest security features but those are usually minor and we don’t want to see those types of notifications."
"It needs better controls to include/exclude specific sections when creating a report that can be shared externally with customers and prospects."
"Improve Mobile Application Dynamic Scanning DAST - .ipa and .apk"
"I think for us the biggest improvement would be to have an indicator when there's something wrong with a scan."
"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."
"With Checkmarx, normally you need to use one tool for quality and you need to use another tool for security. I understand that Checkmarx is not in the parity space because it's totally different, but they could include some free features or recommendations too."
"The reports are good, but they still need to be improved considering what the UI offers."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Checkmarx being Windows only is a hindrance. Another problem is: why can't I choose PostgreSQL?"
"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"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."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."
"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
Pricing and Cost Advice
"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."
"They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey."
"For the value we get out of it, coupled with the live defect review sessions, we find it an effective value for the money. We are a larger organization."
"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."
"Veracode's price is high. I would like them to better optimize their pricing."
"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."
"We use this product per project rather than per developer... Your development model will really determine what the best fit is for you in terms of licensing, because of the project-based licensing. If you do a few projects, that's more attractive. If you have a large number of developers, that would also make the product a little more attractive."
"We have a subscription license that is on a yearly basis, and it's a pretty competitive solution."
"This solution is expensive. The customized package allows you to buy additional users at any time."
"It's relatively expensive."
"The interface used to create custom rules comes at an additional cost."
"The number of users and coverage for languages will have an impact on the cost of the license."
Information Not Available
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Veracode has offered a dynamic analysis testing solution for several years, having launched our first offering in 2015… more »
Top Answer: I would recommend them. They have the ability to cover multiple languages and come with all the features you would… more »
Top Answer: SonarQube depends on completely what you configure the Rules. You will have the option of the Profile creation and can… more »
Top Answer: The major difference I have seen between Checkmarx and SonarQube is : CheckMarx support: Supports a large number of… more »
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Compared 50% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 42% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Also Known As
|IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan|
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.
Checkmarx CxSAST is a highly accurate and flexible Static Code Analysis product that allows organizations to automatically scan un-compiled / un-built code and identify hundreds of security vulnerabilities in all major coding languages. CxSAST is available as a standalone product and can be effectively integrated into the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC) to streamline detection and remediation. CxSAST can be deployed on-premise in a private data center or hosted via a public cloud.
IBM Security AppScan enhances web application security and mobile application security, improves application security program management and strengthens regulatory compliance. By scanning your web and mobile applications prior to deployment, AppScan enables you to identify security vulnerabilities and generate reports and fix recommendations.
Learn more about Veracode
Learn more about Checkmarx
Learn more about HCL AppScan
|State of Missouri, Rekner||YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC||Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT|
Financial Services Firm32%
Computer Software Company8%
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm8%
Computer Software Company36%
Financial Services Firm29%
Comms Service Provider7%
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm12%
Computer Software Company41%
Comms Service Provider18%
Checkmarx is ranked 3rd in Application Security with 18 reviews while HCL AppScan is ranked 16th in Application Security with 4 reviews. Checkmarx is rated 8.0, while HCL AppScan is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Checkmarx writes "Works well with Windows servers but no Linux support and takes too long to scan files". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes "Allows for dynamic scanning but lacks easy CI/CD integration". Checkmarx is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Coverity, WhiteSource and Snyk, whereas HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect and PortSwigger Burp. See our Checkmarx vs. HCL AppScan report.
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.