Riley BlackSenior Security Analyst at a wellness & fitness company
Lead43690Lead Security Architect at a financial services firm
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."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"This solution has helped a lot in finding bugs and vulnerabilities, and the scanner is good enough for simple web apps."
"Some of the extensions, available using Burp Extender, are also very good and we have found issues by using them."
"The Spider is the most useful feature. It helps to analyze the entire web application, and it finds all the passes and offers an automated identification of security issues."
"BurpSuite helps us to identify and fix silly mistakes that are sometimes introduced by our developers in their coding."
"Once I capture the proxy, I'm able to transfer across. All the requested information is there. I can send across the request to what we call a repeater, where I get to ready the payload that I send to the application. Put in malicious content and then see if it's responding to it."
"The suite testing models are very good. It's very secure."
"The way they do the research and they keep their profile up to date is great. They identify vulnerabilities and update them immediately."
"The most valuable feature is that we are able to scan the services and put credentials like a user ID password. We can verify the vulnerability level."
"With our vulnerabilities under control, it's putting our services in compliance and minimizing our risk for exposure."
"The simplicity of exporting reports and the simplicity and clarity of the reports included with the product are good."
"The interface is user-friendly and easy to understand."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the progressive scan. It is good. It's done in 24 hours."
"It is easy to use."
"It is a very stable solution."
"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."
"There is a lot to this product, and it would be good if when you purchase the tool, they can provide us with a more extensive user manual."
"The scanner and crawler need to be improved."
"I would like to see a more optimized solution, as it currently uses a lot of CPU power and memory."
"The number of false positives need to be reduced on the solution."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
"The biggest improvement that I would like to see from PortSwigger that today many people see as an issue in their testing. There might be a feature which might be desired."
"The solution doesn't offer very good scalability."
"The biggest drawback is reporting. It's not so good. I can download them, but they're not so informative."
"It should have better automatic reporting."
"The solution needs to adjust its pricing. They should make it more affordable."
"The pricing does not seem to be competitive."
"The scanner reports a lot of false positives, which is something that needs to be improved."
"The UI is not user-friendly and you don't have a yearly reporting facility where you can slice and dice in different jobs."
"The reporting contains too many false positives."
"The virus code updates are not frequent enough."
"Deployment can be complicated."
"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."
"The cost is approximately $500 for a single license, and there are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees."
"Our licensing cost is approximately $400 USD per year."
"The yearly cost is about $300."
"There is no setup cost and the cost of licensing is affordable."
"Licensing costs are about $450/year for one use. For larger organizations, they're able to test against multiple applications while simultaneously others might have multiple versions of applications which needs to be tested which is why we have the enterprise edition."
"There are different licenses available that include a free version."
"At $400 or $500 per license paid annually, it is a very cheap tool."
"PortSwigger is reasonably-priced. It's fair."
"The product is expensive, at least initially, in comparison to other products in this category."
"There are different options available with respect to licensing."
"The cost is $30,000 USD for one year to cover WAS (Web Application Security) and the VM (Virtual Machine) security in a company with 200 employees."
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.
Burp Suite Professional, by PortSwigger, is the world’s leading toolkit for web security testing. Over 52,000 users worldwide, across all industries and organization sizes, trust Burp Suite Professional to find more vulnerabilities, faster. With expertly-engineered manual and automated tooling, you're able to test smarter - not harder.
PortSwigger is the web security company that is enabling the world to secure the web. Over 50,000 security engineers rely on our software and expertise to secure their world.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 6th in Application Security with 22 reviews while Qualys Web Application Scanning is ranked 14th in Application Security with 6 reviews. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.4, while Qualys Web Application Scanning is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "Great design, excellent features like Intruder, Repeater, Decoder with plenty of plug-ins from community forums". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys Web Application Scanning writes "Has comprehensive SSL security measurements but the price should be lowered". PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner and HCL AppScan, whereas Qualys Web Application Scanning is most compared with OWASP Zap, SonarQube, Fortify WebInspect, HCL AppScan and Checkmarx. See our PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Qualys Web Application Scanning report.
We monitor all Application Security 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.