We performed a comparison between Contrast Security Protect and SonarQube based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has excellent real-time capabilities."
"The product gives a few false positives. We get 99 percent true positives."
"Protect provides us with more in-depth visibility into ongoing attacks."
"The solution has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages."
"The software quality gate streamlines the product's quality."
"The product itself has a friendly UI."
"Code Convention: Using the tool to implement some sort of coding convention is really useful and ensures that the code is consistent no matter how many contributors."
"The static code analysis is very good."
"The most valuable features are the wide array of languages, multiple languages per project, the breakdown of bugs, and the description of vulnerabilities and code smells (best practices)."
"It provides you with many features, as it does with the premium model, but there are still extra features that can be purchased if needed."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"There's room for improvement in the initial setup."
"Protect's reporting GUI is very basic. To get all statuses from the APIs, we needed to write our own KPI dashboard to provide reports."
"Contrast Security Protect needs to improve integration."
"We've been using the Community Edition, which means that we get to use it at our leisure, and they're kind enough to literally give it to us. However, it takes a fair amount of effort to figure out how to get everything up and running. Since we didn't go with the professional paid version, we're not entitled to support. Of course that could be self-correcting if we were to make the step to buy into this and really use it. Then their technical support would be available to us to make strides for using it better."
"It does not provide deeper scanning of vulnerabilities in an application, on a live session. This is something we are not happy about. Maybe the reason for that is we are running the community edition currently, but other editions may improve on that aspect."
"We're in the process of figuring out how to automate the workflow for QA audit controls on it. I think that's perhaps an area that we could use some buffing. We're a Kubernetes shop, so there are some things that aren't direct fits, which we're struggling with on the component Docker side. But nothing major."
"For improvement, this solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud and the support for this solution could be improved. Customizing rules could also be made simpler."
"The security in SonarQube could be better."
"There could be better integration with other products."
"There is need for support for the additional languages and ease of use in adding new rules for detecting issues."
"The product needs to integrate other security tools for security scanning."
Contrast Security Protect is ranked 32nd in Application Security Tools with 3 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 110 reviews. Contrast Security Protect is rated 8.4, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Contrast Security Protect writes "It provides us with more in-depth visibility into ongoing attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Contrast Security Protect is most compared with Fortify on Demand, Snyk, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, Sonatype Lifecycle and HCL AppScan, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and Snyk. See our Contrast Security Protect vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
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.