Compare Ixia BreakingPoint vs. Veracode

Ixia BreakingPoint is ranked 14th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 4 reviews while Veracode is ranked 1st in Application Security Testing (AST) with 41 reviews. Ixia BreakingPoint is rated 8.4, while Veracode is rated 8.2. 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 Veracode writes "Enables us to automatically submit each new build for scanning and get results directly into our JIRA". Ixia BreakingPoint is most compared with Spirent CyberFlood, Codenomicon Defensics and Veracode, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx and Micro Focus Fortify on Demand. See our Ixia BreakingPoint vs. Veracode report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Ixia BreakingPoint Logo
1,685 views|733 comparisons
Veracode Logo
52,113 views|27,753 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Ixia BreakingPoint vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,399 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible.There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades.We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like.The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use.

Read more »

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.I have used this solution in multiple projects for vulnerability testing and finding security leaks within the code.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.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.One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important.It has an easy-to-use interface.Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools.It has almost completely eliminated the presence of SQLi vulnerabilities.

Read more »

Cons
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.The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks.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.I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks.

Read more »

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.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.I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages.Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis.We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times. That kind of feature would save us time.Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives.The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report.It needs more timely support for newer languages and framework versions.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost.We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars.There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that.

Read more »

They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey.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.Veracode has been fair. We use their SaaS solution and it's just an annual subscription.No issues, the pricing seems reasonable.It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool.I recommend going for a one-year licensing with CA, because currently they are the leaders in this field with more features and a much better turn around time with a cheaper position, but there are a lot of new companies coming up in the market and they are building up their platforms.Costs are reasonable. No special infrastructure is required and the license model is good.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.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Testing (AST) solutions are best for your needs.
382,399 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
1,685
Comparisons
733
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
515
Avg. Rating
8.3
Views
52,113
Comparisons
27,753
Reviews
42
Average Words per Review
636
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 49% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Learn
Ixia
Veracode
Overview

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%.

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.

Offer
Learn more about Ixia BreakingPoint
Keep your software secure

Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.

Sample Customers
Corsa TechnologyState of Missouri, Rekner
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm33%
Insurance Company17%
Consumer Goods8%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company38%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm8%
Media Company6%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise26%
Large Enterprise52%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise77%
Find out what your peers are saying about Ixia BreakingPoint vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
382,399 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email