Riley BlackSenior Security Analyst at a wellness & fitness company
Nagaraj SheshachalamLead Cyber Security engineer at a manufacturing company
AscastSecurity Analyst at Millennium Technology Group
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"The reporting being highly accurate is pretty cool. I use another product and I was always looking for answers as to what line, which part of the code, was wrong, and what to do about it. Veracode seems to have a solid database to look things up and a website to look things up."
"There are quite a few features that are very reliable, like the newly launched Veracode Pipelines Scan, which is pretty awesome. It supports the synchronous pipeline pretty well. We been using it out of the Jira plugin, and that is fantastic."
"One of the features they have is Software Composition Analysis. When organizations use third-party, open source libraries with their application development, because they're open source they quite often have a lot of bugs. There are always patches coming out for those open source applications. You really have to stay on your toes and keep up with any third-party libraries that might be integrated into your application. Veracode's Software Composition Analysis scans those libraries and we find that very valuable."
"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 the application security. It also has a reasonable price."
"The most valuable features are Burp Intruder and Burp Scanner."
"You can scan any number of applications and it updates its database."
"The initial setup for us was easy enough. We didn't face too many issues. Deployment took maybe 30 minutes. It's quite quick and doesn't cause too much trouble at the outset."
"The templates feature is very easy. You just choose the kind of attack you want on your web application, and you run it against that template and receive a report. It's great."
"It uses a signature-based method to check for problems with your code and will provide an alert if anything is found."
"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."
"The triage indicator was kind of hard to find. It's a very small arrow and I had no idea it was there."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"If Veracode was more diversified, as far as the number of platforms and the number of applications it could do in our favor, we would be using it even more. But there are a number of platforms it doesn't support. For example, I know they support C+, .NET, and Java, but there are certain platforms they don't support and that was disappointing."
"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."
"The Burp Collaborator needs improvement. There also needs to be improved integration."
"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."
"If we're running a huge number of scans regularly, it slows down the tool."
"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work. We found that we'd try to use widgets, but often getting them to work for us wasn't very clear. They need to be more user friendly or offer better instructions."
"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange. They need to work a little bit more on their interface to make it more understandable. The interface is the only problem. I'm using Rapid7, which is very intuitive. There are other applications available in the market with a better interface. They can include more techniques or options to test different types of security because the templates are limited. It would be great to see them follow the MITRE ATT&CK framework or what is there in tools like Veracode and Synopsys."
"In the future, if they can have integration with a lot of ticketing systems then it would be amazing."
"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 pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."
"It is very reasonably priced compared to what we were paying our previous vendor. For the same price, we are getting much more value and reducing our AppSec costs from 40 to 50 percent."
"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."
"It has a yearly license. I am satisfied with its price."
"We are using the community version, which is free."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
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.
Your web applications may be complex, but your application security testing tool doesn’t need to be. InsightAppSec brings Rapid7’s proven Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) technology to the Insight platform, combining powerful application crawling and attack capabilities, flexibility in scan scope and scheduling, and accuracy in results with a modern UI, intuitive workflows, and sensible data organization. This enables you to identify XSS, SQL injection, CSRF, and other vulnerabilities with unparalleled ease. The best part? All of these capabilities are delivered via the cloud so that you’re up and running in minutes to identify the critical security risks that exist in your applications.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 3rd in Application Security Testing (AST) with 21 reviews while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is ranked 18th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 3 reviews. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.4, while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is rated 9.0. 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 Rapid7 InsightAppSec writes "Excellent web scanning, good technical support, but lacks decent reporting". PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, Qualys Web Application Scanning and GitLab, whereas Rapid7 InsightAppSec is most compared with Rapid7 AppSpider, OWASP Zap, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner and Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. See our PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
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.