We performed a comparison between Synopsys Code Dx and Veracode based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Result: Based on the parameters we compared, Veracode comes out ahead of Synopsys Code Dx. Although both products have valuable features and good technical support, our reviewers found that Synopsys Code Dx has higher false positive rates and less flexibility in licensing options.
"The customers were looking for something around static security and dynamic security, and in all those areas, they were looking for an industry leader with a proven solution. Synopsys is a Gartner leader, so I position this particular technology for the technical pre-sales part of it."
"I like Veracode's ease of integration with various cloud platforms and tools."
"It does software composition analysis, discovering open source software weaknesses."
"It has almost completely eliminated the presence of SQLi vulnerabilities."
"Veracode has good support for microservices, and I also like the sandbox environment. For example, when introducing a new component, we can scan it in a sandbox environment. It will not impact the main environment. When our team fixes it, they. can push it to the production environment when the results are acceptable."
"All the features provided by Veracode are valuable, including static scan, dynamic scan, and MPT (Manual Penetration Testing)."
"It can be very hard to make a good lab environment with a console with log windows and code bases. What I like about Veracode is that they managed to do that. It has a very responsive graphical user interface and has worked very well. I was very pleased with that."
"Ad-hoc scanning during the development cycle and reports for audits are valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the efficiency of the tool in finding vulnerabilities."
"The initial setup is a bit challenging because things are not easy. It needs a lot of technology adaptability plus the customer's environment-specific use cases."
"The JIRA integration automation aspect of it could be improved significantly. We want to have a way to create tickets that are going to allow people to work through those flaws that we're finding. We don't want people to feel like they're missing out on something or that they're not following directions in the right way."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"We are testing Veracode's software composition analysis, but we're having trouble integrating it with SVN. It works out of the box when you use Git but doesn't work as well with other tools like SVN. It's more geared toward Git"
"The cost of the solution is a little bit expensive. Expensive in the sense that there was a hundred percent increase in cost from last year to this year, which is certainly not justified."
"The user interface could be more sleek. Some scanning requirements aren't flexible. Some features take some time for new users to understand (like what exactly "modules" are)."
"Once your report has been generated, you need to review the report with consultation team, especially if it is too detailed on the development side or regarding the language. Then, you need some professional help from their end to help you understand whatever has been identified. Scheduling consultation takes a longer time. So, if you are running multiple reports at the same time, then you need to schedule a multiple consultation times with one of their developers. There are few developers on their end who work can work with your developers, and their schedules are very tight."
"There is also a size limit of 100 MB so we cannot upload files that are larger than that. That could be improved. Also, the duration of the scan is a bit too long."
"It would be nice if Veracode were bundled with some preferred vendors like Salesforce and offered at a discount."
Synopsys Code Dx is ranked 31st in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 1 review while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 194 reviews. Synopsys Code Dx is rated 0.0, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Synopsys Code Dx writes "Facilitates continuous assessment of applications, covering both static and dynamic security aspects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". Synopsys Code Dx is most compared with Checkmarx One, Coverity and SonarQube, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and OWASP Zap.
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.