We performed a comparison between FlexNet Code Insight and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Synopsys, Snyk, Veracode and others in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)."It had a web interface into the reporting tools that was decent, and open source components could be reported per project and/or aggregated similar to other software composition tools."
"I don't have much experience with the solution yet. We're looking at integrating Manual Penetration Testing with JIRA and Bamboo and then building that into a CICD model, so the integration is the most valuable feature so far."
"I like Veracode's integration with our CI/CD. It automatically scans our code when we do the build. It can also detect any security flaws in our third-party libraries. Veracode is good at pinpointing the sections of code that have vulnerabilities."
"Veracode has a nice API that they provide to allow for custom things to be built, or automation. We actually have integrated Veracode into our software development cycle using their API. We actually are able to automatically, every time a new build of a software is completed, submit that application, kick off a scan, and we get results in a much more automated fashion."
"The main feature, and one of the most important, is the static code analysis. We are able to complete an analysis of the security flaws with this platform. It's very good at helping us find and fix flaws."
"It's helping us with security and making sure that we develop faster. It's able to scan every vulnerability. It's very powerful software that one can use to make sure that you have a very good, secure platform."
"The analysis of the vulnerabilities and the results are the most valuable features."
"It provides security of different Shadow IT activities in our environment, especially around application development and website hosting."
"The ability on static scans to be able to do sandbox scans which do not generate metrics."
"I found the user interface cumbersome and difficult to use."
"Veracode has plenty of data. The problem is the information on the dashboards of Veracode, as the user interface is not great. It's not immediately usable. Most of the time, the best way to use it is to just create issues and put them in JIRA... But if I were a startup, and only had products with a good user interface, I wouldn't use Veracode because the UI is very dated."
"The training lab is not very user-friendly and takes a long time to set up."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"It's very expensive for a small organization."
"Static scanning takes a long time, so you need to patiently wait for the scan to achieve. I also think the software could be more accurate. It isn't 100 percent, so you shouldn't completely rely on Veracode. You need to manually verify its findings."
"There were some additional manual steps or work involved that we should not have needed to do."
"It can have more APIs and capabilities to handle other things well. We were doing a trial for it. There were two things that I looked at: one was uploading some Java-related content and the other was uploading database SQL files and having the review done on the quarterback. The Java portion of it worked fine, and it was pretty seamless, but the database portion was not. We uploaded some files to use for vulnerabilities, and the tell-all portion of it was pretty easy. We uploaded a war file and Java files, and we got the reports back on these. They were pretty clear to understand. We did the same thing for the database portion for the most part. However, the content wasn't getting uploaded in a predictable fashion, and it was slow and hard to get done. We had to do it over and over. After it indicated that the content was uploaded, there were no results. There were zero search findings. It was possibly a user error, something that we didn't do correctly, but they had acknowledged that it was something they were currently enhancing. This is something that could be made easier if they haven't already done that. I don't know how many releases they've had in that timeframe. I haven't looked at it since then. It was a trial period."
"Scanning progress is highly dependent on the speed of the Internet."
Earn 20 points
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
FlexNet Code Insight is ranked 17th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) while Veracode is ranked 3rd in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 186 reviews. FlexNet Code Insight is rated 4.0, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of FlexNet Code Insight writes "A decent web interface for reports, but the snippet style code matching requires too much effort". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". FlexNet Code Insight is most compared with Black Duck and Mend.io, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx, Snyk, Fortify on Demand and OWASP Zap.
See our list of best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.
We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.