Checkmarx One Reviews

Cx gives you the ability to push SAST down much lower in the SDLC process. With the use of multiple IDE plugins and the ability to do "incremental" scanning, a scan of your latest code does not bog down your machine as it is offloaded.

It allows for SAST scanning of uncompiled code. Further, it natively integrates with all key repos formats (Git, TFS, SVN, Perforce, etc).

Meta data is always needed. More tutorials/videos for developers to fix their vulnerabilities is nice. Although the API is useful, I would like to see more functionality added.

I've had to restart services/bounce the VM on two rare occasions.

It scales very easy.

Customer Service:

Customer service is good. Engineers have been quick to get back to me regarding issues and custom work that I have performed.

Technical Support:

Technical support is very knowledgeable.

Initial setup couldn't be any easier. Cx has good documentation on environment requirements. As long as you meet those, the installation process takes maybe 30 minutes for an initial setup; perhaps a bit longer if you're adding multiple engines.

An in-house team implemented it.

Everything is negotiable. Checkmarx approached our dealings in good faith and clearly wanted to be around for awhile. It is much more inexpensive than some alternatives.

Before choosing, we also evaluated Fortify, IBM Appscan, Veracode, etc.

We use Checkmarx as a code analysis tool.

We have always used some kind of code analysis tool and Checkmarx has been working for us at this time. We like the tool.

The most valuable feature of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports.

I am using Checkmarx for approximately two years.

The stability of Checkmarx could improve. We're having issues with it, but we don't want to upgrade to the newest version until we make sure that the issues we're having now aren't present in the newer version.

The scan reliability sometimes is impacted and we sometimes have to restart the services to allow scans out of the queue.

Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies.

I have used the support from Checkmarx.

I rate the support from Checkmarx a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I was previously using Fortify but they were antiquated. They were not updating the solution on a regular basis.

The initial setup of Checkmarx is straightforward. The implementation of Checkmarx does not take long because we have a process for it.

We have four people that maintain Checkmarx in our company. We have professional services but I did most of the deployment myself.

My advice to others is that Checkmarx is good compared to the other tools. However, they are all comparable, it depends on what languages they want to scan. Overall, Checkmarx is a decent solution. It would be a good idea to test other solutions.

I rate Checkmarx

• Put the vulnerability details area on the right side of the application or it may be changeable
• Save and reset screen configuration

Vulnerability details part.

• Vulnerability details: Reduce false positive results and improve it by providing more details how I can resolve the vulnerability.
• Implementing a blackout time for any user or teams: Needs improvement. I need to place limits for some users or teams within a specific time frame. For example, between 02:00 to 06:00. They can't start any scanning during that time, even if they have scanner privileges.

In the latest version, the session logout doesn't work properly.

We have two engine licenses, but we can't scan two projects at the same time.

I would give technical support a rating of 9/10.

We were using Fortify. Its software capability was limited in terms of mobile code scanning.

The initial setup was very easy.

We don't have any specific advice about these issues.

We evaluated Fortify and AppScan.

I don't like the latest license update. I can't set a limit for the reviewer account.

It is very easy to insert the tool in the SDLC because there are a wide variety of ways to access the source-code, initiate scans, and review the results. The projects need not care about getting a tool, accessing the tool, and it is cheaper using it.

The most valuable feature for me is the Jenkins Plugin. We usually take a copy of the normal build job for Checkmarx so that:

1. we have all of the source code we need for the build, normal and generated source code;
2. we need only one technical user for scanning the projects (SVN access and Git access need to change the passwords every 90 days).

I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time).

Updating and debugging of queries is not very convenient.

In our last update to version 8.5.0, we had a problem with DB migration but,  overall, I must say it has been stable.

Regarding scalability, we have only one scan engine and our licence allows only two scans at the same time.

I would rate the technical support seven out of 10. When you first create a ticket you sometimes get questions that you wouldn't expect from first-level support.

None. I started with this product.

The initial setup was decribed very well and it was straightforward. We had only two small problems: implementing the SSL certificate, and getting access for LDAP users.

We got a special offer for a 30% reduction for three years, after our first year.

I think for a real source-code scanning tool, you have to add a lot of money for Open Source Analysis, and AppSec Coach (160 Euro per user per year).

I didn’t evaluate this or other solutions, but my team leader had experience with HPE Fortify and he said it is much more expensive, and the service even worse.

Before implementing the product I would evaluate if it is really necessary to scan so many different languages and frameworks. If not, I think there must be a cheaper solution for scanning Java-only applications (which are 90% of our applications).

Checkmarx is a source code application for development, which means from the source code level, you can use Checkmarx to detect your coding errors, and to detect vulnerabilities that could have come from the different tools that you were using to develop your application. At the source code level, you can prevent the weaknesses that the application can carry on the journey of its development and use.  

Checkmarx helps the users to have a secure coding environment and experience, and a secure source code level of application. That main application can leverage or improve the service delivery to customers.

The most valuable features of Checkmarx are difficult to pinpoint because of the way the functionalities and the features are intertwined, it's difficult to say which part of them I prefer most. You initiate the scan, you have a scan, you have the review set, and reporting, they all work together as one whole process. It's not like accounting software, where you have the different features, et cetera. 

The software languages that they support are one of the largest in the market.

Checkmarx could improve by reducing the price.

I have been using Checkmarx within the past 12 months.

Checkmarx has been stable in my usage and I'm confident to recommend it to anybody.

Checkmarx is very scalable. It can run for a small and large organizations.

The technical support is good.

I rate the support from Checkmarx a four out of five.

Positive

The initial setup of Checkmarx is easy.

I rate the initial setup of Checkmarx a four out of five.

We use one engineer with the help of Checkmarx for support and deployment.

The price of Checkmarx could be reduced to match their competitors, it is expensive.

I strongly recommend Checkmarx to others. I have sold the solution for nearly eight years, and I'm not aware of any major complaints that the users have that could not be resolved.

I rate Checkmarx an eight out of ten.

The Checkmarx application is a live wire of technology delivery, and if your application is vulnerable, then the asset that your acquisition will run will also suffer vulnerability. Providing the scanning ability that shows the errors at the source code level is critical to have effective development of any critical application.

I would recommend Checkmarx eight because it's very critical and integral to the improvement of technology and cyber security today. It's a critical tool in protecting cyberspace, your asset in cyberspace, and an application that runs nearly all human life today. Everything is driven by technology and application.

We mainly use Checkmarx for accreditation, checking for vulnerabilities, and identifying areas in the code to fix some of the NIST 800 security controls.

The most valuable feature is that it actually identifies the different criteria you can set to meet whatever standards you're trying to get your system accredited for. It's also pretty intuitive and has a lot of good dashboards and metrics.

Checkmarx could be improved with more integration with third-party software.

I've been using Checkmarx for about six months.

We've had no issues with Checkmarx's stability.

I thought Checkmarx was pretty scalable.

My experience with Checkmarx's technical support has been very positive.

Positive

I found the setup pretty straightforward, though it took several days because the system engineers had to go through some different configuration settings to get it done.

We worked with Checkmarx when we ran into issues, and they were pretty responsive.

Checkmarx isn't accredited by the US government for DOD networks, so we've been forced to remove it from the network. I'd rate Checkmarx as seven out of ten.

We use Checkmarx for security vulnerability identification. We are using its latest version. We have a license to upgrade to the latest version. Whenever there is a new version, we update it to the latest version.

The identification of verification-related security vulnerabilities is really important and one of the key things. It also identifies vulnerabilities for any kind of third-party tool coming into the system or any third-party tools that you are using, which is very useful for avoiding random hacking.

We are trying to find out if there is a way to identify the run-time null values. I am analyzing different tools to check if there is any tool that supports run-time null value identification, but I don't think any of the tools in the market currently supports this feature. It would be helpful if Checkmarx can identify and throw an exception for a null value at the run time. It would make things a lot easier if there is a way for Checkmarx to identify nullable fields or hard-coded values in the code.

The accessibility for customized Checkmarx rules is currently limited and should be improved. In addition, it would be great if Checkmarx can do static code and dynamic code validation. It does a lot of security-related scanning, and it should also do static code and dynamic code validation. Currently, for security-related validation, we are using Checkmarx, and for static code and dynamic code validation, we are using some other tools. We are spending money on different tools. We can pay a little extra money and use Checkmarx for everything.

I have been using this solution for two years. 

Its stability is okay.

We don't directly deal with the Checkmarx technical team. There is a support group available for that, and they work with the Checkmarx team. When we have any issues, we directly call our internal team, and they call the Checkmarx team. They get back to us pretty quickly. The response is very quick. There is no problem.

The initial setup was easy. Our project was quite big, and it took a bit longer. It took almost six hours. We could not do it as CI/CD pipeline because the pipeline expects a response in a short span of time, which was a challenge for us. We are now doing the Checkmarx review manually. We first run the code analysis, and, after the code analysis is over, we go for the pipeline. This is an overhead for us. 

It would be helpful if they can improve the speed of the analysis rate. We also need to find out from our side if there is a way to increase the wait time of the CI/CD pipeline and modify the timeout limit. It would then take 30 minutes to one hour rather than five or six hours. We should be able to adjust the timeout time, change the CI/CD settings, and go ahead with the integrated process. Currently, we cannot have an integrated system, and we also have to move from one script to the next script manually.

Even though we run it manually, it captures most of the things. We decided to go with Checkmarx two years ago, and we are continuing with it. 

I would rate Checkmarx a seven out of ten. There are a few things that can be improved in this solution.

I use the tool for testing purposes. 

The tool's valuable features include integrating GPT and Copilot. Additionally, the UI web representation is very user-friendly, making navigation easy. GPT has made several improvements to my security code.

I can't create a business case with multiple-factor authentication.

I have been working with the product for two years. 

While support handles tickets and resolves specific issues, such as business cases, it can be frustrating waiting for responses. They often take a lot of time to address cases or provide resolutions.

Neutral

Checkmarx One's deployment is easy. When we deployed it for a new client, it took around a month to complete. This involved setting up all parameters and sub-administrators. Additionally, finalizing the project involved several tasks, such as scanning with all security gates.

We can get a return in six months. 

The tool's pricing is fine. 

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.