Polyspace Code Prover vs Sonatype Lifecycle comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
MathWorks Logo
1,773 views|1,161 comparisons
80% willing to recommend
Sonatype Logo
13,374 views|7,366 comparisons
89% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Polyspace Code Prover and Sonatype Lifecycle 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Polyspace Code Prover vs. Sonatype Lifecycle Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,246 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect.""The outputs are very reliable.""When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences.""The product detects memory corruptions.""Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."

More Polyspace Code Prover Pros →

"The policy engine is really cool. It allows you to set different types of policy violations, things such as the age of the component and the quality: Is it something that's being maintained? Those are all really great in helping get ahead of problems before they arise. You might otherwise end up with a library that's end-of-life and is not going to get any more fixes.""The application onboarding and policy grandfathering features are good and the solution integrates well with our existing DevOps tools.""For us, it's seeing not only the licensing and security vulnerabilities but also seeing the age of the open-sources included within our software. That allows us to take proactive steps to make sure we're updating the software to versions that are regularly maintained and that don't have any vulnerabilities.""It's helped us free up staff time.""What's really nice about that is it shows a graph of all the versions for that particular component, and it marks out the ones that have a vulnerability and the ones that don't have a vulnerability.""The scanning capability is its most valuable feature, discovering vulnerable open source libraries.""It's online, which means if a change is made to the Nexus database today, or within the hour, my developers will benefit instantly. The security features are discovered continuously. So if Nexus finds out that a library is no longer safe, they just have to flag it and, automatically, my developers will know.""The REST API is the most useful for us because it allows us to drive it remotely and, ideally, to automate it."

More Sonatype Lifecycle Pros →

Cons
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes.""The tool has some stability issues.""One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run.""I'd like the data to be taken from any format.""Automation could be a challenge."

More Polyspace Code Prover Cons →

"It can be tricky if you want to exclude some files from scanning. For instance, if you do not want to scan and push testing files to Fortify Software Security Center, that is tricky with some IDEs, such as IntelliJ. We found that there is an Exclude feature that is not working. We reported that to them for future fixing. It needs some work on the plugins to make them consistent across IDEs and make them easier.""If they had a more comprehensive online tutorial base, both for admin and developers, that would help. It would be good if they actually ran through some scenarios, regarding what happens if I do pick up a vulnerability. How do I fork out into the various decisions? If the vulnerability is not of a severe nature, can I just go ahead with it until it becomes severe? This is important because, obviously, business demands certain deliverables to be ready at a certain time.""The team managing Nexus Lifecycle reported that their internal libraries were not being identified, so they have asked Sonatype's technical team to include that in the upcoming version.""The user interface needs to be improved. It is slow for us. We use Nexus IQ mostly via APIs. We don't use the interface that much, but when we use it, certain areas are just unresponsive or very slow to load. So, performance-wise, the UI is not fast enough for us, but we don't use it that much anyway.""It's the right kind of tool and going in the right direction, but it really needs to be more code-driven and oriented to be scaled at the developer level.""In the beginning, we sometimes struggle to access the customer environment. The customer must issue the required certificates because many customers use cell phone certificates, and Sonatype needs a valid CA certificate.""One area of improvement, about which I have spoken to the Sonatype architect a while ago, is related to the installation. We still have an installation on Linux machines. The installation should move to EKS or Kubernetes so that we can do rollover updates, and we don't have to take the service down. My primary focus is to have at least triple line availability of my tools, which gives me a very small window to update my tools, including IQ. Not having them on Kubernetes means that every time we are performing an upgrade, there is downtime. It impacts the 0.1% allocated downtime that we are allowed to have, which becomes a challenge. So, if there is Kubernetes installation, it would be much easier. That's one thing that definitely needs to be improved.""They're working on the high-quality data with Conan. For Conan applications, when it was first deployed to Nexus IQ, it would scan one file type for dependencies. We don't use that method in Conan, we use another file type, which is an acceptable method in Conan, and they didn't have support for that other file type. I think they didn't even know about it because they aren't super familiar with Conan yet. I informed them that there's this other file type that they could scan for dependencies, and that's what they added functionality for."

More Sonatype Lifecycle Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Its pricing is competitive within the market. It's not very cheap, it's not very expensive."
  • "We're pretty happy with the price, for what it is delivering for us and the value we're getting from it."
  • "Pricing is comparable with some of the other products. We are happy with the pricing."
  • "The price is good. We certainly get a lot more in return. However, it's also hard to get the funds to roll out such a product for the entire firm. Therefore, pricing has been a limiting factor for us. However, it's a fair price."
  • "The license fee may be a bit harder for startups to justify. But it will save you a headache later as well as peace of mind. Additionally, it shows your own customers that you value security stuff and will protect yourselves from any licensing issues, which is good marketing too."
  • "In addition to the license fee for IQ Server, you have to factor in some running costs. We use AWS, so we spun up an additional VM to run this. If the database is RDS that adds a little bit extra too. Of course someone could run it on a pre-existing VM or physical server to reduce costs. I should add that compared to the license fee, the running costs are so minimal they had no effect on our decision to use IQ Server."
  • "Pricing is decent. It's not horrible. It's middle-of-the-road, as far as our ranking goes. They're a little bit more but that's also because they provide more."
  • "Lifecycle, to the best of my recollection, had the best pricing compared with other solutions."
  • More Sonatype Lifecycle Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    768,246 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts… more »
    Top Answer:There are two main areas of improvement. * False negatives and false positives. * The speed of the validation itself. Another area I see for improvement is scalability, particularly when dealing with… more »
    Top Answer:We like the data that Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle consistently delivers. This solution helps us in fixing and understanding the issues a lot quicker. The policy engine allows you to set up different… more »
    Top Answer:Fortify integrates with various development environments and tools, such as IDEs (Integrated Development Environments) and CI/CD pipelines.
    Top Answer:I would rate the affordability of the solution as an eight out of ten.
    Ranking
    Views
    1,773
    Comparisons
    1,161
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    656
    Rating
    7.6
    Views
    13,374
    Comparisons
    7,366
    Reviews
    15
    Average Words per Review
    1,056
    Rating
    8.1
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle, Nexus Lifecycle
    Learn More
    MathWorks
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Polyspace Code Prover is a sound static analysis tool that proves the absence of overflow, divide-by-zero, out-of-bounds array access, and certain other run-time errors in C and C++ source code. It produces results without requiring program execution, code instrumentation, or test cases. Polyspace Code Prover uses semantic analysis and abstract interpretation based on formal methods to verify software interprocedural, control, and data flow behavior. You can use it on handwritten code, generated code, or a combination of the two. Each operation is color-coded to indicate whether it is free of run-time errors, proven to fail, unreachable, or unproven.

    Sonatype Lifecycle is an open-source security and dependency management software that uses only one tool to automatically find open-source vulnerabilities at every stage of the System Development Life Cycle (SDLC). Users can now minimize security vulnerabilities, permitting organizations to enhance development workflow. Sonatype Lifecycle gives the user complete control over their software supply chain, allowing them to regain wasted time fighting risks in the SDLC. In addition, this software unifies the ability to define rules, actions, and policies that work best for your organizations and teams.

    Sonatype Lifecycle allows users to help their teams discover threats before an attack has the chance to take place by examining a database of known vulnerabilities. With continuous monitoring at every stage of the development life cycle, Sonatype Lifecycle enables teams to build secure software. The solution allows users to utilize a complete automated solution within their existing workflows. Once a potential threat is identified, the solution’s policies will automatically rectify it.

    Benefits of Open-source Security Monitoring

    As cybersecurity attacks are on the rise, organizations are at constant risk for data breaches. Managing your software supply chain gets trickier as your organization grows, leaving many vulnerabilities exposed. With easily accessible source code that can be modified and shared freely, open-source monitoring gives users complete transparency. A community of professionals can inspect open-source code to ensure fewer bugs, and any open-source dependency vulnerability will be detected and fixed rapidly. Users can use open-source security monitoring to avoid attacks through automatic detection of potential threats and rectification immediately and automatically.

    Reviews from Real Users

    Sonatype Lifecycle software receives high praise from users for many reasons. Among them are the abilities to identify and rectify vulnerabilities at every stage of the SDLC, help with open-source governance, and minimize risk.

    Michael E., senior enterprise architect at MIB Group, says "Some of the more profound features include the REST APIs. We tend to make use of those a lot. They also have a plugin for our CI/CD.”

    R.S., senior architect at a insurance company, notes “Specifically features that have been good include:

    • the email notifications
    • the API, which has been good to work with for reporting, because we have some downstream reporting requirements
    • that it's been really user-friendly to work with.”

    "Its engine itself is most valuable in terms of the way it calculates and decides whether a security vulnerability exists or not. That's the most important thing. Its security is also pretty good, and its listing about the severities is also good," says Subham S., engineering tools and platform manager at BT - British Telecom.

    Sample Customers
    Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
    Genome.One, Blackboard, Crediterform, Crosskey, Intuit, Progress Software, Qualys, Liberty Mutual Insurance
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company34%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Transportation Company7%
    Retailer5%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Insurance Company11%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Government9%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise76%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise57%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    Polyspace Code Prover vs. Sonatype Lifecycle
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Polyspace Code Prover vs. Sonatype Lifecycle and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    768,246 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews while Sonatype Lifecycle is ranked 6th in Application Security Tools with 42 reviews. Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6, while Sonatype Lifecycle is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sonatype Lifecycle writes "Seamless to integrate and identify vulnerabilities and frees up staff time". Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork, CodeSonar and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas Sonatype Lifecycle is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Fortify Static Code Analyzer, GitLab and Checkmarx One. See our Polyspace Code Prover vs. Sonatype Lifecycle 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.