SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) Reviews

I use this solution for our staging environment to review the security issues before going live or into production.

I have found this solution creates more noise than competitors. 

The documentation and reporting extract can improve because other solutions are far more advanced.

I have been using this solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. However, we do not use it as a SaaS solution, we use it for our staging environment at a minimum scale. 

We have approximately 10 people using this solution in my organization.

Previously I worked with Fortify and Veracode and I have found those tools provided much better because they are from a commercial solution.

Our development team did the implementation of this solution.

This solution is free.

My advice to others is this solution is one of the best in the free market in the industry and it is a good one to use.

I rate SonarQube a seven out of ten.

We are working in the banking sector, and our application code is quite large in terms of performance. Ranorex has helped us a lot to follow Java code conventions for writing performance oriented code.

It also has very good compatibility with continuous integration servers like Hudson and Jenkins.

It had changed the whole attitude of the developers of our team as they can see their code exceptions at compile time. With this, we have delivered a quality product to our stakeholders.

It would be great if it also covered XML code.

We have been using this solution in our Java web application for the last 18 months. We embedded SonarQube with the help of a SonarQube-maven plugin in our web application.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It's excellent as we get everything we need from the product.

It was somewhat complex as we have to integrate it with Apache Maven-2.2.1, and there is no listing of SonarQube version compatibility with Apache Maven.

We did it in-house.

It is quite an efficient product in terms of ROI.

Its is available on open to use license.

We did some R&D according to our product need and found SonarQube as a solution.

I would advise you to implement SonarQube if they are facing any performance related issues in their products.

I use SonarQube for testing software.

The solution can verify vulnerabilities, code smells, and hotspots. It makes the software more secure and it helps make a junior or novice developer sharper.

The software testing tool capability could improve. It does not always integrate well. You have to use a specific plugin and the plugin does not always go in Apple's applications.

In the next release, they should add the ability to analyze containers.

I have been using SonarQube for approximately three years.

We have mostly software developers using this solution are there are approximately 50 using it.

I have used Snyk and it is more catered to a different audience than SolarQube.SolarQube is more for software developers.

The installation is straightforward, especially with the new Docker implementation.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

The process of purchasing the solution could improve.

This solution is a good static test tool for developers. It helps keep the maintainability and security of software.

I rate SonarQube an eight out of ten.

We are using it for scanning our web applications, some internal applications and using it for code reviews.

SonarQube is good in terms of code review and to report on basic vulnerabilities in your applications. The code writing standard of SonarQube is good. It may be better in other editions but as we don't use those we're not able to find out with SonarQube. We are using the community, developer version for 14 days. If this version is successful we will go to the full version. We're using it on-premises.

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 have been using SonarQube for one year.

It is stable.

SonarQube is scalable.

SonarQube was easy to setup.

We considered using Fortify.

I would rate SonarQube an eight out of 10.

We are using this solution to check and monitor application code to ensure security quality.

The solution has helped us mitigate problems in applications before they were a bigger issue.

The solution could improve by having better-consulting services.

I have been using SonarQube within the last 12 months.

The stability is good.

The installation was straightforward, we have an internal team that does it.

We have a team in our organization that does the implementation, configuration, and maintenance of the solution.

The price of the solution could be reduced.

I rate SonarQube a ten out of ten.

We use SonarQube to help with our software development and testing. At the moment, we're mainly using it for static analysis and code inspection. We have an on-premises server and we connect to it from there.

Our main use case is testing software for security weaknesses, but we also use it to help eliminate code smells and to make sure our code is compliant with established coding standards.

SonarQube lets us find security issues during development and testing so that we can release more secure and higher quality applications.

Apart from the security point of view, I like that it makes it easy to detect code smells and other issues in terms of code quality and standards.

From a reporting perspective, we sometimes have problems interpreting the vulnerability scan reports. For example, if it finds a possible threat, our analysts have to manually check the provided reports, and sometimes we have issues getting all the data needed to properly verify if it's accurate or not.

This is especially important when considering false positives, and often we have issues getting all the necessary information from SonarQube in order to determine whether it is a true vulnerability or a false positive.

Another suggestion for improvement is that SonarQube could be better when it comes to integration with different development pipelines for continuous monitoring. For example, whether you are scanning manually or on-demand, we would like more ways to integrate SonarQube into our pipeline so that we can get reports quickly and automatically as we work.

I have been using SonarQube for about two years now.

I have not run into major issues or bugs and it works well when it comes to stability.

I don't think we have had any problem with traffic or things like that. 

I don't have experience with SonarQube support because we do it all ourselves. 

I have not used any other similar solutions in the past. SonarQube is the first of its kind in my experience.

It's quite easy to set up, not too complex.

The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost.

Personally, I can't compare it to other similar solutions like Fortify, but SonarQube does a good job when it comes to making sure our code is compliant with standards and free of any obvious security weaknesses. 

I would rate SonarQube a six out of ten.

Quality Gate helps us to merge code that was not covered with tests.

• We can create a Quality Gate in order to fail Jenkins jobs where the code coverage is lower than the set percentage.
• We can review possible faults in JavaScript code.

We had some issues where the Quality Gate check sometimes gets stuck and it is unclear.

We had some stability issues where the Quality Gate check sometimes got stuck and it was unclear. This seldom happens.

There were no scalability issues.

The technical support team has experts on it. They are available on Twitter, Google Groups, and StackOverflow.

We did not use a different tool before this one.

The initial setup required unzipping it and having MySQL install. We then set up a couple of configuration files. There was no need for IT for this.

This is open source.

We use it as a gatekeeper for our external developers to follow the rules. If they don't comply with the rules within the source code, they cannot commit. 

It is working fine. It provides good value for money.

One thing to improve would be the integration. There is a steep learning curve to get it integrated.

I have been using this solution for maybe two years.

It is stable.

It is definitely scalable. Currently, we have six users.

We didn't contact them.

This was our first one.

Its initial setup is okay. It is not too difficult. It probably took a couple of hours.

One developer is enough for its deployment.

We pay €10 per month for this solution, which is good. It provides good value for money.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate SonarQube a nine out of 10.