We performed a comparison between Cisco SecureX and SonarQube 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."Integrates well with our existing security infrastructure."
"The automation and orchestration tools are the most valuable features."
"The ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to manage all the applications and visibility. For example, if there is malware, spam, or another component that wants to attack the company in my servers, network, or applications, then SecureX will react to the problem."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"SecureX takes all the separate pieces of security within your company, adds in intelligence from different sites and services on the internet, and makes them work together."
"Using SecureX, a tool provided by Cisco, we can easily integrate it with many of our other Cisco products such as Cisco ISE and many networking devices."
"One of the most valuable features is the simplicity of deploying SecureX. It's very easy to do that and then you gain very detailed visibility into everything that's going on in your network and, obviously, at the device level. There's just a wealth of information that you can pull from all of these products that are part of SecureX. You know exactly if you have an issue or not."
"It helps our developers work more efficiently as we can identify things in a code prior to it being pushed to where it needs to go."
"Using SonarQube benefits us because we are able to avoid the inclusion of malware in our applications."
"The most valuable function is its usability."
"The solution is stable."
"I follow Quality Gate's graduation model within organization, and it is extremely helpful for me to benchmark products."
"All the features of the solution are quite good."
"If you want to have your code scanned and timed then this is a good tool."
"The solution's user interface is very user-friendly."
"I would like it to integrate with another solution, e.g., DNA. I would like it to connect to that solution, but not the security aspect."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"Enhancing automation capabilities could further improve the product."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"I'm not sure that I would call it a bug, but sometimes the solution is a little slow."
"The playbooks provided with the product are great, although I would appreciate having more playbooks available. Threats are constantly evolving, so having access to updated playbooks is crucial."
"I am not very pleased with the technical debt computation."
"If I configure a project in SonarQube, it generates a token. When we're compiling our code with SonarQube, we have to provide the token for security reasons. If IP-based connectivity is established with the solution, the project should automatically be populated without providing any additional token. It will be easy to provide just the IP address. It currently supports this functionality, but it makes a different branch in the project dashboard. From the configuration and dashboard point of view, it should have some transformations. There can be dashboard integration so that we can configure the dashboard for different purposes."
"New plug-ins should be integrated into SonarCloud to give more flexibility to the product."
"There could be better integration with other products."
"I would like to see improvements in defining the quality sets of rules and the quality to ensure code with low-performance does not end up in production."
"Dynamic scanning is missing and there are some issues with security scanning."
"The reporting is good, but I am not able to download a specific report as a PDF, so downloading reports is something that should be looked at."
"Code security scanning could be improved."
Cisco SecureX is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 13 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 108 reviews. Cisco SecureX is rated 9.0, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco SecureX writes "Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Cisco SecureX is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Trend Vision One, Splunk SOAR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and Snyk. See our Cisco SecureX vs. SonarQube 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.
