Coverity vs Spirent CyberFlood comparison

Black Duck and Spirent are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Black Duck is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Spirent is ranked #32 with an average rating of 7.0. Black Duck holds a 8.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Spirent’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Spirent users who would recommend it.

Coverity

Read 42 Coverity reviews

13,639 Views
9,320 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Spirent CyberFlood

Read 4 Spirent CyberFlood reviews

566 Views
362 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Coverity

Spirent CyberFlood

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Spirent CyberFlood and Coverity compete in network testing and software development, respectively. Coverity seems to have the upper hand due to its feature-rich platform that offers higher perceived user value despite its cost.

Features: Spirent CyberFlood offers comprehensive testing capabilities, efficient simulation of real-world network conditions, and dependable features. Coverity provides robust static analysis tools, enhanced code quality, and advanced development alignment.

Room for Improvement: Spirent CyberFlood needs better integration with other testing tools, smoother interoperability, and enhanced user experience. Coverity requires system performance improvements, increased scalability, and reduced resource consumption.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Spirent CyberFlood features a straightforward deployment process and responsive customer service. Coverity has a competitive deployment model that often demands more configuration efforts, supported by well-received customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Spirent CyberFlood has reasonable setup costs and positive ROI over time, with significant support benefits. Coverity's initial costs are higher, yet its features justify investment through substantial code quality enhancement, offering greater long-term returns.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 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

Spirent CyberFlood

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

32nd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (35th)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.5%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Spirent CyberFlood is 0.3%, up from 0.3% 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

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

Haider Jarral

Lead Technologist | Strategic Alliance | Business Development at Illumio

I like the solution's flexibility

Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing.

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

"It help us identify the latest security vulnerabilities."

"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."

"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 security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its interprocedural analysis, which is advantageous because it compares favorably with other tools in terms of security and code analysis."

"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 most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."

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

More Coverity pros

"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."

"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."

"CyberFlood is flexible."

"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."

Cons

"Its price can be improved. Price is always an issue with Synopsys."

"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."

"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."

"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."

"The solution could use more rules."

"There should be additional IDE support."

"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."

"The setup takes very long."

More Coverity cons

"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."

"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."

"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."

"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is affordable."

"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."

"The tool was fairly priced."

"The tool's price is somewhere in the middle. It's neither cheap nor expensive. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."

"It is expensive."

"Offers varying prices for different companies"

"Coverity is very expensive."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."

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

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

32%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

22%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about Coverity?

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

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

I do not know about the pricing.

See all answers

What do you like most about Spirent CyberFlood?

CyberFlood is flexible.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?

I use CyberFlood to generate SSL traffic for cybersecurity testing.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Compared 53% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

Ixia BreakingPoint vs Spirent CyberFlood

Compared 73% of the time

Ixia BreakingPoint VE vs Spirent CyberFlood

Compared 27% of the time

More Spirent CyberFlood Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

December 2024

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

December 2024

Download Spirent CyberFlood product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing

Learn More

Black Duck

Spirent

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.

Spirent’s revolutionary CyberFlood security and application testing solution is now available as a virtual platform offering you simplified use, by consolidating multiple test functions into a completely virtual test environment.

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

Digicel

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood

December 2024

Free Report: Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood

Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Coverity vs. Spirent CyberFlood 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.