CodeSonar vs Synopsys Defensics comparison

The compared CodeSecure and Black Duck solutions aren't in the same category. CodeSecure is ranked #30 in AS , with an average rating of 7.5, and holds a 1.3% mindshare in the category. Black Duck is ranked #5 in FTT , and holds a 20.5% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

1,969 Views
1,263 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Synopsys Defensics

Read 4 Synopsys Defensics reviews

136 Views
90 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Synopsys Defensics

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and Synopsys Defensics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Security Tools Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,168 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

CodeSonar

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (30th), Static Code Analysis (7th)

Synopsys Defensics

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Fuzz Testing Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

CodeSonar and Synopsys Defensics aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. CodeSonar is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.3%, up 0.9% compared to last year.
Synopsys Defensics, on the other hand, focuses on Fuzz Testing Tools, holds 20.5% mindshare, up 12.0% since last year.

Application Security Tools

Fuzz Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

it_user586716

Application Secutiy Engineer at a healthcare company with 11-50 employees

Technical support provided protocol-specific documentation to prove that some positives were not false.

A security assurance engineer was able to perform due diligence across all network-facing protocols. My prior organization designed, developed and deployed a Network Attached Storage (NAS) appliance. A key part of the company wide security assurance program for all products, is to perform penetration testing against all network facing IP ports. For the web, SSL and RESTful APIs, there are very good COTS and open source tools to perform Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) testing. Unfortunately for NAS protocols like SMB, NFS, CIFS, and iSCSI, I researched and found that Codenomicon Defensics was the only viable source to satisfy our DAST requirements. Through the use of Selenium for automated web testing, it was easily found out that Codenomicon Defensics could be integrated into our Continuous Integration / Continuous Deployment (CI / CD) Agile processes, specific to automated testing. Also, like many of the other application security testing products, Defensics incorporates automatic update support and works on Windows, MacOS and Linux desktops.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"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 tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"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."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"It has been able to scale."

"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."

"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

Cons

"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."

"It was expensive."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"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."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."

"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."

"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"Licensing is a bit expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

26%

Computer Software Company

13%

University

10%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CodeSonar?

CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CodeSonar?

The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools. I rate its pricing a four out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CodeSonar?

Our license model allows one user per license. Currently, we have limitations for VPN profiles. We can’t share the key with other users. There could be a shared licensing model for the users. It wi...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs CodeSonar

Compared 60% of the time

Coverity vs CodeSonar

Compared 18% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 8% of the time

Klocwork vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

Fortify Static Code Analyzer vs CodeSonar

Compared 3% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 27% of the time

Snyk vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 21% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 8% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 8% of the time

More Synopsys Defensics Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

December 2024

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

GitLab vs. Synopsys Defensics

December 2024

Download Synopsys Defensics product report

Also Known As

No data available

Defensics, Codenomicon Defensics

Learn More

CodeSecure

Black Duck

Overview

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

Defensics® fuzz testing is a comprehensive, powerful, and automated black box solution that enables organizations to effectively and efficiently discover and remediate security weaknesses in software. By taking a systematic and intelligent approach to negative testing, Defensics allows organizations to ensure software security without compromising on product innovation, increasing time to market, or inflating operational costs.

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

December 2024

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.