We performed a comparison between Seeker and SonarQube based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Testing (AST)."A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
"I like the by-default policies that are they, as they seem to cover most of what I need."
"This has improved our organization because it has helped to find Security Vulnerabilities."
"The features of SonarQube that I find most valuable for identifying code smells are its comprehensive code analysis capabilities, which cover various aspects of code sustainability."
"It provides the security that is required from a solution for financial businesses."
"The initial setup is simple. It requires some security, but it's simple."
"It's a great product. If you are in a hurry and just want to focus on the functional requirements of any kind of project, SonarQube is highly helpful. It enables the developers to code securely. SonarQube has a Community edition, which is open source and free. There are also three proprietary or paid versions: Enterprise edition, Data Center edition, and Developer edition."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free."
"This solution is simple to use and can be quickly deployed."
"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
"I would like to see more options for security, beyond the basics like SQL injection."
"I would also like SonarQube to be able to write custom scanning rules. More documentation would be helpful as well because some of our guys were struggling with the customization script."
"The documentation is not clear and it needs to be updated."
"The BPM language is important and should be considered in SonarQube."
"Code security scanning could be improved."
"The product needs to integrate other security tools for security scanning."
"If there was an official Docker image of SonarQube that could easily integrate into the pipeline would help the user to plug in and plug out and use it directly without any custom configuration. I am not sure if this is being offered already in an update but it would be very helpful."
"I have found this solution creates more noise than competitors."
Seeker is ranked 24th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 1 review while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Testing (AST) with 108 reviews. Seeker is rated 7.0, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Seeker writes "More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Seeker is most compared with Synopsys API Security Testing, Coverity, Contrast Security Assess, Polaris Software Integrity Platform and Checkmarx One, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and Snyk.
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.
