Contrast Security Assess vs Parasoft SOAtest comparison

Contrast Security and Parasoft are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Contrast Security is ranked #24 with an average rating of 8.7, while Parasoft is ranked #31 with an average rating of 7.0. Contrast Security holds a 0.4% mindshare in SAST, compared to Parasoft’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Parasoft users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

922 Views
599 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Parasoft SOAtest

Read 30 Parasoft SOAtest reviews

1,016 Views
652 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Parasoft SOAtest

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Parasoft SOAtest and Contrast Security Assess are tools aimed at enhancing software security and testing efficiency. While Parasoft SOAtest is known for its competitive pricing and comprehensive support, Contrast Security Assess has the edge with its advanced features that justify its cost.

Features: Parasoft SOAtest offers automation capabilities, integration with CI/CD pipelines, and testing efficiency enhancements. Contrast Security Assess provides real-time vulnerability assessment, scalability, and dynamic analysis, which users find superior to SOAtest.

Room for Improvement: Parasoft SOAtest could benefit from improved documentation, more intuitive configuration options, and enhanced user interface design. Contrast Security Assess needs better integration with certain development frameworks, improved initial setup process, and more comprehensive training materials.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Parasoft SOAtest is praised for its straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service, ensuring a smoother user experience. Contrast Security Assess, while slightly more complex to deploy, is commended for its knowledgeable customer support team that aids in problem-solving.

Pricing and ROI: Parasoft SOAtest's pricing structure is viewed as reasonable, providing strong ROI through effective test automation. Contrast Security Assess, although more expensive, offers a compelling ROI by facilitating continuous vulnerability assessments, enhancing long-term value.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Parasoft SOAtest Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Parasoft SOAtest

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 815,854 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

24th

Average Rating

8.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th)

Parasoft SOAtest

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

31st

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Functional Testing Tools (23rd), API Testing Tools (9th), Test Automation Tools (23rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Parasoft SOAtest is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at Deloitte

Nov 27, 2023

A stable solution that provides lots of details on web-based vulnerabilities and source code reviews

Contrast Security Assess has a really good UI and gives the details in more depth. It gives more information about web application vulnerabilities. If third-party libraries, JS files, and JAR files have any CVEs in them, the solution reports that and gives a grade from A to E. It gives good…

Read full review

Ajit Kumar Rout

Sr Quality Assurance Engineer at Wabtec Industrial

Aug 6, 2021

Good API testing and RIT feature; clarity could be improved

In general, this is a hassle free, user friendly tool and it doesn't require much knowledge if you're using the manual testing. Automated testing is also good but requires some knowledge in that field. It has some great features. It's a good tool compared to some of the other paid tools; input and output can be stored before extension and there is also a verification assessment that can be implemented by using some different methodologies inside the tool. If the licensing cost is suitable then I recommend this solution. If you have automation people with in-depth knowledge in coding that will be helpful. I rate this solution a seven out of 10.

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

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."

"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."

"Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."

"We can automate our scenarios in a data driven format, which shows there is no rework on scripts. We only need to update the test data and run for a number of scenarios."

"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."

"We have seen a return on investment."

"The solution is scalable."

"The testing time is shortened because we generate test data automatically with SOAtest."

More Parasoft SOAtest pros

Cons

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"The performance could be a bit better."

"The summary reports could be improved."

"Reporting facilities can be better."

"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."

"Enabling/disabling an optional element of an XML request is only possible if a data source (e.g., Excel sheet) is connected to the test. Otherwise, the option is not available at all in the drop-down menu."

"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."

"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."

"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."

More Parasoft SOAtest cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"The solution is expensive."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"It is an expensive product, so think carefully about whether it fits your purposes and is the right tool for you."

"I think it would be a great step to decrease the price of the licenses."

"We are completed satisfied with Parasoft SOAtest. The ROI is more than 95%."

"The cost of Parasoft seems to have gotten higher with a projection that wasn't really stipulated for our company. They've done a tremendous job at negotiating those deals."

"The price is around $5,000 USD."

"They do have a confusing licensing structure."

"From what I understand, Parasoft SOAtest isn't the cheapest option. But it has a lot to offer."

"The license price is a little expensive, but it provides a better outcome in terms of the end-to-end automation process."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

19%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

27%

Manufacturing Company

17%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Contrast Security Assess?

The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Parasoft SOAtest?

Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Parasoft SOAtest?

The price is average. It isn't overly expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Parasoft SOAtest?

Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings. Going through that is a challenge. It only happens in the initial stage when we are setting up the tool, but it can be imp...

See all answers

Comparisons

Seeker vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 19% of the time

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 16% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 12% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

Mend.io vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Postman vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 24% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 19% of the time

Coverity vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 13% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

ReadyAPI vs Parasoft SOAtest

Compared 8% of the time

More Parasoft SOAtest Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

November 2024

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Parasoft SOAtest

November 2024

Download Parasoft SOAtest product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

SOAtest

Learn More

Contrast Security

Parasoft

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Parasoft SOAtest delivers fully integrated API and web service testing capabilities that automate end-to-end functional API testing. Streamline automated testing with advanced codeless test creation for applications with multiple interfaces (REST & SOAP APIs, microservices, databases, and more).

SOAtest reduces the risk of security breaches and performance outages by transforming functional testing artifacts into security and load equivalents. Such reuse, along with continuous monitoring of APIs for change, allows faster and more efficient testing.

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Charter Communications, Sabre, Caesars Entertainment, Charles Schwab, ING, Intel, Northbridge Financial, Capital Services, WoodmenLife

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Parasoft SOAtest

October 2024

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. Parasoft SOAtest

Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. Parasoft SOAtest and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.