Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Polyspace Code Prover vs Synopsys Defensics comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Polyspace Code Prover
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (18th)
Synopsys Defensics
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Fuzz Testing Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Polyspace Code Prover and Synopsys Defensics aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Polyspace Code Prover is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.1%, up 0.7% compared to last year.
Synopsys Defensics, on the other hand, focuses on Fuzz Testing Tools, holds 21.3% mindshare, up 13.1% since last year.
Application Security Tools
Fuzz Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Aman Singla - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to setup with reliable outputs and good reliability
It is easy to set up the solution. We can actually modify it using script also. It's pretty easy to link it with our in-house toolchain with the Polyspace configuration settings. If we have small amounts of data, it's quick and you can set it up within ten to 15 minutes. However, depending on the size of the data and the variables, it could take a while since you have to provide a range for all variables. If you have, for example, 500 variables, you'll be configuring a lot. However, the input extremes can be fed using an Excel file or some other format.
it_user508521 - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps us complete testing more quickly by eliminating many unwanted test cases
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, and from that we can generate automated test cases, but what happens on the target device, what is the reason for the crash, for that we have to do manual debugging. They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful. They can improve a lot on that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The outputs are very reliable."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"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."
"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."
 

Cons

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"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."
"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the paid version."
"Licensing is a bit expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
838,737 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
38%
Computer Software Company
12%
Transportation Company
5%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
21%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Polyspace Code Prover?
When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts,...
What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?
I'm still trying to use constraints with range propagation, but I can't get it to work properly, and I haven't found any documentation. It require support. There could be an issue with range propag...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Defensics, Codenomicon Defensics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: January 2025.
838,737 professionals have used our research since 2012.