Coverity vs Kiuwan comparison

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

1,597 Views
1,274 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Coverity

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Kiuwan and Coverity are notable tools in the code analysis category. Coverity has an upper hand due to its comprehensive features and superior functionality.

Features: Kiuwan provides a cloud-based architecture, facilitating integration and workflow streamlining. It offers responsive support and competitive pricing. Coverity is praised for its static analysis, detailed reporting, and a robust feature set, enhancing its value proposition.

Room for Improvement: Kiuwan could improve detailed reporting, expand customization options, and enhance user interface usability. Coverity might focus on developing better documentation, increasing update speed, and improving accessibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiuwan is easy to deploy, supported by excellent customer service, aiding swift issue resolution. Coverity has a more complex installation process but also offers strong customer support. There is potential for Coverity to refine its deployment model for a smoother experience.

Pricing and ROI: Kiuwan is seen as cost-effective, providing high ROI through lower setup costs and efficient operations. Coverity, with a higher initial cost, justifies its pricing with advanced features and long-term benefits, offering a favorable ROI based on its capability set.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: October 2024).

Download the complete report

Coverity vs. Kiuwan

October 2024

Helped 814,763 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Coverity

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Kiuwan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

15th

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (19th)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.4%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 0.9%, down from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

Cyber Security Chartered Engineer at Banglalink

May 3, 2024

Offers impressive reporting features with user-friendliness and high scalability

The solution can be easily setup but requires heavy integration due to the multiple types of port and programming languages involved. Comparing the resource requirements of the solution I would say it can be installed effortlessly. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. A professional needs some pre-acquired knowledge to manage Coverity's deployment process, but the local solution partners provide support well enough for trouble-free deployment. The overall deployment process of Coverity took around two and a half hours in our organization. The deployment duration depends upon the operating system and resources including high-end RAM and CPU processors.

Read full review

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at Deloitte

Nov 27, 2023

Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement

Kiuwan is useful because it provides functions related to secure code review, source code review, detection of security vulnerabilities, and development of proper input validations to get proper output and coding to see if all the systems in our environment are properly used. Some SQL queries are…

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

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."

"This solution is easy to use."

"It's very stable."

"The product is easy to use."

"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."

"I like Coverity's capability to scan codes once we push it. We don't need more time to review our colleagues' codes. Its UI is pretty straightforward."

"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."

"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."

More Coverity pros

"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."

"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."

"The solution has a continuous integration process."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."

"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."

"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."

"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"The product lacks sufficient customization options."

"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."

"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."

"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."

"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."

"The tool needs to improve its reporting."

"We're currently facing a primary challenge with automation using Coverity. Each developer has a license and can perform manual checks, and we also have a nightly build that analyzes the entire software. The main issue is that the tool can't look behind submodules in our code base, so it doesn't see changes stored there."

"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."

More Coverity cons

"The development-to-delivery phase."

"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."

"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."

"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."

"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."

"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."

"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."

"I would like to see additional languages supported."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool was fairly priced."

"Offers varying prices for different companies"

"Coverity is quite expensive."

"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"The solution is affordable."

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."

"It is expensive."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"Check with your account manager."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

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

814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

32%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?

We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...

What do you like most about Coverity?

The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

We do it yearly.

What do you like most about Kiuwan?

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kiuwan?

I'm not entirely sure about the price and business aspects, but I assume Checkmarx might be less expensive. I think Checkmarx might offer more affordable options, especially in its smaller business...

What needs improvement with Kiuwan?

Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran...

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Comparisons

Compared 54% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Kiuwan

Compared 56% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 10% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 9% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Kiuwan

Compared 6% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Download Coverity product report

Coverity

November 2024

Download Kiuwan product report

October 2024

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

No data available

Learn More

Black Duck

Overview

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts.

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial