We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and Coverity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."
"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"It has been able to scale."
"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."
"It was expensive."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"I would like to see integration with popular IDEs, such as Eclipse."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."
"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."
"The solution could use more rules."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."
CodeSonar is ranked 21st in Application Security Tools with 7 reviews while Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 34 reviews. CodeSonar is rated 8.2, while Coverity is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CodeSonar writes "Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". CodeSonar is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Polyspace Code Prover, Semgrep Code and Fortify Static Code Analyzer, whereas Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Parasoft SOAtest.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
