We performed a comparison between Checkmarx and Synopsys Defensics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."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 SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"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."
"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"The solution improved the efficiency of our code security reviews. It helps tremendously because it finds hundreds of potential problems sometimes."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."
"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."
"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."
"Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price."
"Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient."
"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."
"They could work to improve the user interface. Right now, it really is lacking."
"Its pricing model can be improved. Sometimes, it is a little complex to understand its pricing model."
"Checkmarx has a slightly difficult compilation with the CI/CD pipeline."
"Checkmarx reports many false positives that we need to manually segregate and mark “Not exploitable”."
"The product's reporting feature could be better. The feature works well for developers, but reports generated to be shared with external parties are poor, it lacks the details one gets when viewing the results directly from the Checkmarx One platform."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."
"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."
Earn 20 points
Checkmarx is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Synopsys Defensics is ranked 5th in Fuzz Testing Tools. Checkmarx is rated 7.6, while Synopsys Defensics is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Checkmarx writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Synopsys Defensics writes "Technical support provided protocol-specific documentation to prove that some positives were not false". Checkmarx is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Synopsys Defensics is most compared with Snyk, SonarQube, Invicti, Fortify on Demand and OWASP Zap.
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.