We performed a comparison between CAST Highlight and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed."
"It offers good performance."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."
"Veracode Fix is a new feature that functions similarly to auto-remediation for low or medium flaw codes."
"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"The coverage of the last vulnerabilities reported."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its extensive reporting capabilities and user-friendly interface."
"Provides the ability to understand the black zones in our system."
"One thing we like is the secret detection feature. It has helped us to discover keys stored in our settings file as a TXT document. We can address that vulnerability by using encryption. We can even scan Docker images for vulnerabilities. Static analysis is another good feature of Veracode because we can run a security scan during development to identify the vulnerabilities."
"In pipeline scanning, there is a configuration that can be set with respect to the security level of the flaw. If there is a high or a critical issue, there's a way the build can be failed and blocked before going into production."
"It has given our management a view into issues with all of our product lines. We have three products and all of them were scanned. As a result, the project lead for each product has taken measures to improve things."
"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."
"Veracode has plenty of data. The problem is the information on the dashboards of Veracode, as the user interface is not great. It's not immediately usable. Most of the time, the best way to use it is to just create issues and put them in JIRA... But if I were a startup, and only had products with a good user interface, I wouldn't use Veracode because the UI is very dated."
"It should include more informational, low level, vulnerability summaries and groupings. Large related groups of low level vulnerabilities may amount to a design flaw or another avenue for attack."
"Mitigation review isn't always super easy."
"Security can always be improved."
"From the usability perspective, it is not up to date with the latest trends. It looks very old. Tools such as Datadog, New Relic, or infrastructure security tools, such as AWS Cloud, seem very user-friendly. They are completely web-based, and you can navigate through them pretty quickly, whereas Veracode is very rigid. It is like an old-school enterprise application. It does the job, but they need to invest a little more on the usability front."
"I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages."
"One area for improvement is the navigation in the UI. For junior developers or newcomers to the team, it can be confusing. The UI doesn't clearly bundle together certain elements associated with a scan. While running a scan, there are various aspects linked to it, but in the UI, they appear separate. It would be beneficial if they could redesign the UI to make it more intuitive for users."
"The JIRA integration automation aspect of it could be improved significantly. We want to have a way to create tickets that are going to allow people to work through those flaws that we're finding. We don't want people to feel like they're missing out on something or that they're not following directions in the right way."
CAST Highlight is ranked 10th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 5 reviews while Veracode is ranked 3rd in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 194 reviews. CAST Highlight is rated 7.8, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CAST Highlight writes "Easy to set up with optimized and automated insights". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". CAST Highlight is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Checkmarx One, Black Duck and GitLab, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and OWASP Zap. See our CAST Highlight vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.
We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.
