Compare CodeSonar vs. Klocwork

CodeSonar is ranked 16th in Application Security with 1 review while Klocwork is ranked 8th in Application Security with 8 reviews. CodeSonar is rated 9.0, while Klocwork is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CodeSonar writes "Catches critical code defects at the source code level". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "The product has a low false positive rate, but they could loosen up on their licensing". CodeSonar is most compared with SonarQube and Coverity, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode and Coverity.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Veracode Logo
47,953 views|25,711 comparisons
CodeSonar Logo
195 views|111 comparisons
Klocwork Logo
7,090 views|4,433 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Use CodeSonar? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, SonarQube, Checkmarx and others in Application Security. Updated: October 2019.
371,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
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.I have used this solution in multiple projects for vulnerability testing and finding security leaks within the code.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.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.One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important.It has an easy-to-use interface.Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools.It has almost completely eliminated the presence of SQLi vulnerabilities.

Read more »

The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks.

Read more »

The ability to create custom checkers is a plus.I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not.The tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time.We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability.

Read more »

Cons
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.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.I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages.Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis.We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times. That kind of feature would save us time.Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives.The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report.It needs more timely support for newer languages and framework versions.

Read more »

The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved.

Read more »

Now the only issue we have is that whenever we need to get the code we have to build it first. Then we can get the report.I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc.Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case.We bought Klocwork, but it was limited to one little program, but the program is now sort of failing. So, we have a license for usage on a program that is sort of failing, and we really can't use the license on anything else.The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey.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.Veracode has been fair. We use their SaaS solution and it's just an annual subscription.No issues, the pricing seems reasonable.It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool.I recommend going for a one-year licensing with CA, because currently they are the leaders in this field with more features and a much better turn around time with a cheaper position, but there are a lot of new companies coming up in the market and they are building up their platforms.Costs are reasonable. No special infrastructure is required and the license model is good.I think the pricing is in line with the rest of the tools. I think you get what you pay for. It is certainly not inexpensive, but the value proposition is there. There are certainly cheaper tools, but I don't think we'd be getting the support that we get with those, and that is what separates this product from the others.

Read more »

Pricing is a bit costly.

Read more »

Klocwork is still tight on their licensing. If Klocwork would loosen up on the licensing, and where the license could be used, and how many different programs could be run on it, then we have several development programs that I would love to be able to use it for going forward.Klocwork should not to be quite so heavy handed on the licensing for very specific programs.The limitation that we have is that Klocwork is licensed to certain programs, and if you want to license them to other programs, you have to pay more money.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security solutions are best for your needs.
371,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 48% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 82% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 42% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Learn
Veracode
GrammaTech
Rogue Wave
Overview

Veracode is an application security company that offers an automated cloud-based service for securing web, mobile and third-party enterprise applications. Veracode provides multiple security analysis technologies on a single platform, including static analysis, dynamic analysis, mobile application behavioral analysis and software composition analysis.

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

Klocwork detects security, safety, and reliability issues in real-time by using this static code analysis toolkit that works alongside developers, finding issues as early as possible, and integrates with teams, supporting continuous integration and actionable reporting.

Offer
Learn More About Veracode

Stay Up-To-Date on Application Security 

Learn more about CodeSonar
Learn more about Klocwork
Sample Customers
State of Missouri, ReknerViveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONYACCESS Co Ltd, Risk-AI, Winbond Electronics, Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute, University of Southern California, Alebra Technologies, SIMULIA, Risk Management Solutions, Brigham Young University, SRD, HRL
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm35%
Insurance Company17%
Consumer Goods9%
Hospitality Company4%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company36%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm9%
Retailer5%
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company32%
Manufacturing Company24%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm8%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise27%
Large Enterprise51%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise77%
No Data Available
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, SonarQube, Checkmarx and others in Application Security. Updated: October 2019.
371,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email