Anonymous UserDevSecOps Consultant at a comms service provider
Ryan CarrieSecurity Analyst at a computer software company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"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."
"Cost is a drawback. It's somewhat costly."
"It's expensive, but you get what you pay for. There were no problems with the base license and how they do it. It was transparent. You don't have to worry. You can scan to your heart's delight."
Earn 20 points
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.
The Seeker solution helps businesses find high-risk security weaknesses while fostering collaboration between development and security teams. It exposes vulnerable code and ties it directly to business impact and exploitation scenarios, providing a clear explanation of risks. By accelerating adoption of security testing technologies into the software development lifecycle (SDLC), customers across industries such as financial, health, energy and retail can get to market faster with increased stability and certainty.
Nexus Lifecycle gives you full control over your software supply chain and allows you to define rules, actions, and policies that work best for your organization and teams.
Quotium Seeker is ranked 32nd in Application Security while Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle is ranked 3rd in Application Security with 18 reviews. Quotium Seeker is rated 0.0, while Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle is rated 8.6. On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle writes "Checks our libraries for security and licensing issues". Quotium Seeker is most compared with Contrast Security Assess, whereas Sonatype Nexus Lifecycle is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, WhiteSource, JFrog Xray and Snyk.
See our list of best Application Security vendors.
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.