We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Radware Bot Manager 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 main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"The setup is very easy. There is a lot of information in the documents which makes the install not difficult at all."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"The solution is scalable, but other solutions are better."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that its number of false positives is less than the other security application platforms. Its ease of use is another good feature. It also supports most of the languages."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."
"Bot Manager is an excellent tool for analyzing traffic to detect suspicious patterns. It uses artificial intelligence to identify malicious behavior."
"I like how Bot Manager automatically detects when a suspicious user attempts to download content from your website."
"Bot Manager's behavioral modeling and intelligence help us distinguish between harmless and malicious bots."
"It's very good at categorizing the different types of bots, whether they're malicious or good. Bot is a very generic term. It could be good, it could be bad. Quite a lot of legitimate businesses are using bot-type services to just scrape the internet for information."
"The most valuable feature is the bot management itself and the way it has stopped bots from scraping our site, with its AI mechanism. Its ability to detect and mitigate bots is really good."
"The solution provides a rating of the sophistication of the bot attack."
"Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"Micro-services need to be included in the next release."
"The plugins for the development environment have room for improvements such as for Android Studio and X code."
"They can support the remaining languages that are currently not supported. They can also create a different model that can identify zero-day attacks. They can work on different patterns to identify and detect zero-day vulnerability attacks."
"We're missing links to their modules for installation and configuration. They have most of them available already, but there were situations for mobile applications that, when they released a new version, were not stable. We had to ask them to send a link by email, and that could be made accessible in the portal."
"It would be beneficial to have a link from the WAF to the Bot Manager portal available so we do not have to log in again."
"It would be good to have more integrations. It's very hard to get data in and out of their portal. It doesn't have any integrations with any of our tools, such as our SIEM tool. It only depends on emails. Having that tied into the warehouse, SIEM, and maybe our on-call tools would be very helpful because it would just give us a holistic picture of everything."
"Radware Bot Manager is a little costly but not too expensive. It's in the middle."
"I would like more ability to configure custom rules. Currently, I need to open a ticket with support to request a specific rule that isn't available in the console. In some cases, I don't have visibility into the logs or they are too complicated to analyze."
"Bot Manager is doing its job, but I think the behavioral modeling could be improved by adding fingerprinting and automation. Remediation should be automated so that it doesn't require any intervention by the user."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Radware Bot Manager is ranked 3rd in Bot Management with 8 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Radware Bot Manager is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Bot Manager writes "Categorizes different types of bots very well and is very effective at detecting and mitigating bots in real time". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Radware Bot Manager is most compared with Fastly, F5 Shape Security, Akamai Bot Manager, Cloudflare and AWS WAF. See our Checkmarx One vs. Radware Bot Manager report.
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.