Most Helpful Review
Researched Micro Focus Fortify on Demand but chose Veracode: Improved our security posture without the overhead of supporting infrastructure
Use CodeSonar? Share your opinion.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
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.
The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks.
Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good.
The most valuable feature is that it connects with your development platforms, such as Microsoft Information Server and Jira.
This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market.
t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved.
The static code analyzers are the most valuable features of this solution.
The solution scans our code and provides us with a dashboard of all the vulnerabilities and the criticality of the vulnerabilities. It is very useful that they provide right then and there all the information about the vulnerability, including possible fixes, as well as some additional documentation and links to the authoritative sources of why this is an issue and what's the correct way to deal with it.
I do not remember any issues with stability.
The licensing was good.
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.
The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved.
The vulnerability analysis does not always provide guidelines for what the developer should do in order to correct the problem, which means that the code has to be manually inspected and understood.
This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect.
The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to.
The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed.
The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment.
Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse.
There were some regulated compliances, which were not there.
Sometimes when we run a full scan, we have a bunch of issues in the code. We should not have any issues.
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.
Pricing is a bit costly.
The pricing can be improved because it is complex when compared to the competition.
It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount.
The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server.
The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps.
Compared 50% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 63% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Also Known As
|Fortify on Demand|
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.
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.
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand’s application security-as-a-service is the easy and flexible way to identify vulnerabilities in your applications without additional investment in software or personnel. Allow our global team to work for you, providing support and technical expertise 24/7.
Keep your software secure
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
Learn more about CodeSonar
Learn more about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
|State of Missouri, Rekner||Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY||SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.|
Financial Services Firm31%
Software R&D Company40%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm6%
Software R&D Company45%
Comms Service Provider18%
K 12 Educational Company Or School10%
Financial Services Firm42%
Software R&D Company8%
Software R&D Company43%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm7%
No Data Available