Most Helpful Review
Usually when we deploy the application, there is a process for ethical hacking. The main benefit is that, the ethical hacking is almost clean, every time. So it's less cost, less effort, less time to production.
I don't have to have a team of developers behind me that keep up with all the latest threats because the subscription service they provide for me does that.
What's important for me, from Veracode, is the all-in-one metrics location. I can see where everything is across the entire portfolio of applications I have in this program, and I can report out on it.
The most valuable feature is the remediation consulting that they give. I feel like any vendor can identify the flaws but fixing the flaws is what is most important. Being able to have those consultation calls, schedule them in the platform, and have that discussion with an applications expert, that process scales well and that is what has allowed a lot more reduction of risk to happen.
One of the best things they offer is the scalability. The fact that you can work with it through the cloud means that if you have unintegrated business units, you don't have to worry about having a solution on-prem and having the network connection; you don't have to worry about giving up source code, you are just sending your binary files for most of the applications. So it scales much faster.
The developers' awareness of the security weaknesses within their code has improved. They aren't just mitigating these issues, they are realizing these are, in fact, issues that have to be dealt with.
The one thing we really liked about Veracode when we got it was the consultation calls; that our developers are able to schedule them on their own, instead of going to a "gatekeeper." They upload their code, they have questions, they schedule it, they speak with someone on the other side who is an expert, they can speak developer-to-developers.
It's not "one policy fits all." I really like that Veracode allows me to set up specific policies that I can apply to applications.
Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products.
I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources.
I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers.
It's a little bit basic when you talk about the Web Services. If AppScan improved its maturity on Web Services testing, that would be good.
When we scan binary, when we perform binary analysis, it could go faster. That has a lot to do with the essence of scanning binary code, it takes a little bit longer. Certain aspects, depending on what type of code it is, take a little long, especially legacy code.
I would like to see more technical support for some of the connectors, some more detailed diagrams or run-books on how to install some of stuff; more hand-holding in the sense of understanding our environment.
They cover a lot of languages already and it doesn't make sense for them to cover legacy languages but I know there is a need for covering legacy languages.
The only areas that I'm concerned with are some of the newer code libraries, things that we're starting to see people dabble with. They move quickly enough to get them into the Analysis Engine, so I wouldn't even say it is a complaint. It is probably the only thing I worry about: Occasionally hitting something that is built in some other obscure development model, where we either can't scan it or can't scan it very well.
I would also like to see some improvement in the speed. That is really the only complaint, but in all reality we have a massive Java application that needs to be scanned. Our developers are saying, "It takes 72 hours to scan it." That is probably the nature of the beast, and I'm actually pretty accepting of that time frame, but since it's a complaint that I get, faster is always better. I don't necessarily think that the speed is bad as it is, just that faster would be better.
It should include more informational, low level, vulnerability summaries and groupings. Large related groups of low level vulnerabilities may amount to a design flaw or another avenue for attack.
Pricing and Cost Advice
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.
Regarding licensing, pay very close attention to what applications you're going to need to do dynamic scanning for, versus static. Right now, the way the licensing is set up, if you don't have any static elements for a website, you can certainly avoid some costs by doing more dynamic licenses. You need to pay very close attention to that, because if you find out later that you have static code elements - like Java scripts, etc. - that you want to have scanned statically, having the two licenses bundled together will actually save you money.
We're very comfortable with their model. We think they're a good value. We worked very closely with Veracode on understanding their license model, understanding what comprises the fee and what does not. With their assistance in design, we decomposed our application in a way where we are scanning a very significant amount of code without wasting their capacity and generating redundant reported issues. You scan in profiles, per se. And we work with them, in their offices, to design the most effective approach. So the advice I would have for customers is, you can get up and live fast, but work closely with Veracode to refine the method you use for scanning and the way you compile the applications. There's a concept called entry-point scanning, and that's probably not used well by the rest of their customers. We see our licensing as a good value because we leverage it heavily.
Licensing is pretty flexible. It's a little bit weird, it's by the size of the binary, which is a strange way to license a product. So far they've been pretty flexible about it.
I don't really get too involved in the cost sides of things that's in my job, I'm more of a technical focus, but I have heard from my manager and a couple other people that the solution is quite expensive.
If you're licensing, and you're looking at licensing models, you might want to ask Veracode about their microservice, depending on the company. If you are a microservice architecture, I would suggest asking them about their microservice pricing. I would suggest that you evaluate that with your code and their other licensing model, which is like a lump sum in size of artifacts, and just make sure that you price that out with them, because there might be some tradeoffs that can be made in price.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
See more IBM Security AppScan competitors »
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 28% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
See more Veracode competitors »
Compared 15% of the time.
Also Known As
|Also Known As||Rational AppScan, AppScan|
IBM Security AppScan enhances web application security and mobile application security, improves application security program management and strengthens regulatory compliance. By scanning your web and mobile applications prior to deployment, AppScan enables you to identify security vulnerabilities and generate reports and fix recommendations.
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.
Learn more about IBM Security AppScan
Learn more about Veracode
|Sample Customers||Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT||State of Missouri, Rekner|
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
VISITORS READING REVIEWS