Anonymous UserDevSecOps Consultant at a comms service provider
Pavel KubikSystems Engineer at a tech services company
Sarath Kumar ChodaySenior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies
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."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."
"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."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"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."
"Veracode is expensive. Some of its products are expensive. I don't think it's way more expensive than its competitors. The dynamic is definitely worth it, as I think it's cheaper than the competitors. The static scan is a little bit more expensive, around 20 percent more expensive. The manual pen test is more expensive, but it is an expensive service because it's a manual pen test and we also do retests. I don't think it is way more expensive than the competitors, but it's about 15 to 20 percent more expensive."
"We use this product per project rather than per developer... Your development model will really determine what the best fit is for you in terms of licensing, because of the project-based licensing. If you do a few projects, that's more attractive. If you have a large number of developers, that would also make the product a little more attractive."
"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."
"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."
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.
By simulating real-world legitimate traffic, distributed denial of service (DDoS), exploits, malware, and fuzzing, BreakingPoint validates an organization’s security infrastructure, reduces the risk of network degradation by almost 80%, and increases attack readiness by nearly 70%.
Ixia BreakingPoint is ranked 19th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 3 reviews while Synopsys Defensics is ranked 2nd in Fuzz Testing Tools with 1 review. Ixia BreakingPoint is rated 8.4, while Synopsys Defensics is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Ixia BreakingPoint writes "Validates the datasheets for anti-malware, DDoS, and ransomware response with prediction". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Synopsys Defensics writes "Product security tests for switches and router sections". Ixia BreakingPoint is most compared with Spirent CyberFlood and OWASP Zap, whereas Synopsys Defensics is most compared with Coverity, Checkmarx, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Spirent CyberFlood and OWASP Zap.
See our list of .
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.