Most Helpful Review
Researched Contrast Security Assess but chose Veracode: The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure
Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. Fortify WebInspect and other solutions. Updated: November 2020.
447,718 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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."
"What I find most valuable is the fact that we can install the agents onto the web server and then it does the automatic scanning. Every day when I come in, I log into Contrast and I can see the agent reports, real-time, on the vulnerabilities. I can see my list of security vulnerabilities that are immediately reported on a daily basis."
"In terms of the costs saved, we had something like 2,000 vulnerabilities — some critical and some high — and I don't even know how to put a price on that. Sometimes a vulnerability can end up costing 100 times what it would cost to fix in a development environment. So you can start to calculate what that cost would be, per vulnerability."
"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."
"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."
"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."
"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."
"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."
"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."
"Technical support has been good."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting. We're looking for a dashboard. One of the things that I have to do right now is export to Excel spreadsheets to get the management-level view that I need to present to the leadership team. We can do a report on applications within the tool, but as far as management goes, they want to see a high-level view of all the applications."
"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."
"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."
"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."
"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."
"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."
"The initial setup was complex."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
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."
"There are some folks who felt we could get a cheaper tool, but there's a tradeoff there. We could have gotten a cheaper SAST tool, but what we would have saved in money we would have spent in learning-curve time."
"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."
"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."
"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."
"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
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: What I find most valuable is the fact that we can install the agents onto the web server and then it does the automatic… more »
Top Answer: The pricing was a point of contention even within our organization. There are some folks who felt we could get a cheaper… more »
Top Answer: There is room for improvement in the reporting. We're looking for a dashboard. One of the things that I have to do right… more »
Top Answer: The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use.
Top Answer: The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand.
Compared 50% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 1% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Also Known As
|Contrast Assess||Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect|
|Veracode||Contrast Security||Micro Focus|
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.
Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.
|Most enterprises rely heavily on the Web to conduct their normal operations, whether providing services, a mechanism for retail sales, or a host of other functions. Yet, most still struggle with efficiently managing their application security risks. For one thing, they need solutions of scale that can be used to manage thousands of active sites and assessments while also tracking discovered vulnerabilities, retesting procedures, and more. They need to perform repeated security tests to address compliance with regulations, legislation, and internal security policies and also see how their risk posture has changed over time. The enterprises have to protect their data, brand, and bottom line from the harsh impacts of what successful vulnerability exploitation could bring. Micro Focus WebInspect Enterprise enables organizations to solve these security problems quickly, efficiently, and intelligently.|
Learn more about Veracode
Learn more about Contrast Security Assess
Learn more about Fortify WebInspect
|State of Missouri, Rekner||Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.||Aaron's|
Financial Services Firm30%
Computer Software Company8%
Computer Software Company37%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm7%
Computer Software Company45%
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm4%
Computer Software Company43%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm4%
No Data Available
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.