We performed a comparison between Kiuwan and Klocwork 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."I've found the reporting features the most helpful."
"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."
"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"The reporting helps us understand the trend of our results and whether we improve over time. We can see the history within Klocwork's server architecture and know that we're making things better. It creates a great story for our management. We can demonstrate value and how our software is developing over time."
"The most valuable feature of Klocwork is finding defects while you're doing the coding. For example, if you have an IDE plug-in of Klocwork on Visual Studio or Eclipse, you can find the faults; similar to using spell check on Word, you can find out defects during the development phase, which means that you don't have to wait till the development is over to find the flaws and address the deficiencies. I also find language support in Klocwork good because it used to support only C, C++, C#, and Java, but now, it also supports Java scripts and Python."
"Klocwork's most valuable feature is the static code analysis feature. It detects the potential problem earlier to allow the developer to receive feedback quickly and then address it before it becomes a problem."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."
"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"Under NIST cybersecurity standards, we must address vulnerabilities within a specified time after discovering them. When we try to propagate those updates and fixes through the system, it would be nice if the clients could reconnect to the existing server or have the server dynamically updated in some way. I know that isn't easy, but maybe processes could be enhanced to make that more streamlined from a DevOps perspective."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"Now the only issue we have is that whenever we need to get the code we have to build it first. Then we can get the report."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"We bought Klocwork, but it was limited to one little program, but the program is now sort of failing. So, we have a license for usage on a program that is sort of failing, and we really can't use the license on anything else."
Kiuwan is ranked 21st in Application Security Tools with 23 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 18th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. Kiuwan is rated 8.6, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Kiuwan writes "Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Kiuwan is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Veracode, Snyk and Fortify on Demand, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and Checkmarx One. See our Kiuwan vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
