Contrast Security Assess vs Polyspace Code Prover comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Contrast Security Logo
1,402 views|859 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
MathWorks Logo
1,773 views|1,161 comparisons
80% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Contrast Security Assess and Polyspace Code Prover 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover Report (Updated: March 2024).
767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.""Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs.""The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of.""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.""By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time.""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.""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.""I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

More Contrast Security Assess Pros →

"The product detects memory corruptions.""Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect.""Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool.""The outputs are very reliable.""When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."

More Polyspace Code Prover Pros →

Cons
"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.""Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side.""The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective.""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.""The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes.""The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities.""To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use.""I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

More Contrast Security Assess Cons →

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes.""I'd like the data to be taken from any format.""Automation could be a challenge.""One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run.""The tool has some stability issues."

More Polyspace Code Prover Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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."
  • "It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."
  • "The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."
  • "The solution is expensive."
  • More Contrast Security Assess Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.
    Top Answer:The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten.
    Top Answer:Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to the… more »
    Top Answer:When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts… more »
    Top Answer:There are two main areas of improvement. * False negatives and false positives. * The speed of the validation itself. Another area I see for improvement is scalability, particularly when dealing with… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    1,402
    Comparisons
    859
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    511
    Rating
    8.5
    Views
    1,773
    Comparisons
    1,161
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    656
    Rating
    7.6
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Contrast Assess
    Learn More
    MathWorks
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    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.

    Polyspace Code Prover is a sound static analysis tool that proves the absence of overflow, divide-by-zero, out-of-bounds array access, and certain other run-time errors in C and C++ source code. It produces results without requiring program execution, code instrumentation, or test cases. Polyspace Code Prover uses semantic analysis and abstract interpretation based on formal methods to verify software interprocedural, control, and data flow behavior. You can use it on handwritten code, generated code, or a combination of the two. Each operation is color-coded to indicate whether it is free of run-time errors, proven to fail, unreachable, or unproven.

    Sample Customers
    Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.
    Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Computer Software Company10%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company34%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Transportation Company7%
    Retailer5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise55%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise75%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise77%
    Buyer's Guide
    Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Contrast Security Assess is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Contrast Security Assess is rated 8.8, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Contrast Security Assess writes "We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Contrast Security Assess is most compared with Veracode, Seeker, Fortify WebInspect, Checkmarx One and HCL AppScan, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork, CodeSonar and Parasoft SOAtest. See our Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.

    See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

    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.