SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) Reviews

We use SonarQube to scan SAS code for quality control in mostly mobile applications, such as iOS and Android applications.

SonarQube is designed well making it easy to use, simple to identify issues and find solutions to problems.

The solution could improve the management reports by making them easier to understand for the technical team that needs to review them.

I have been using the free version of SonarQube for approximately one year and then I purchased a subscription that I have been using for the last three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution has scaled well for our needs. We have two million lines of code and we have not had a problem.

We work for a large enterprise that has approximately 1,000 IT employees.

There is a lot of information for SonarQube online in the community forums. I only used technical support when I needed to renew my license.

The installation is not difficult.

The solution has a free version and a license version. The license is priced reasonably, the cost of hiring one programmer is more expensive than the solution.

The licensing process could be improved. We need to contact purchasing to receive the key for the license but the process should be automatic, similar to a SAS purchase.

I have evaluated Fortify Application Defender.

I rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

We use it to check the code quality of our software.

We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. The solution works quite well remotely.

We would appreciate having PNC checking, though that's only available in a more expensive license type.

There is also room for improvement in the installation process.

I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

It is a stable solution. So, no issues with stability.

We haven't had much requirement for scalability. We had a single-node instance, and that is sufficient for our needs.

We have around 13 developers using this solution. 

Another department handled the installation. We only had one issue related to the number of available files. To perform the analysis, you have quite a lot of available file handles, so we had to increase that limit.

However, maintenance is actually quite easy. It requires a couple of people.

We used some main code quality tools before, along with certain plugins. SonarQube is better due to its integrated nature and easier management. There is no hassle to keep everything up to date.

I would definitely recommend using the solution.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. While I'm satisfied with the product, there's always room for improvement.

Our use case of SonarQube is to analyze code quality and to implement quality dates in our build pipelines.

The ability to tweak the rules and feed them into our build pipelines so that they can become an integral part of those pipelines is a valuable feature. This product works really well, the integrations and pipelines are good.

SonarQube currently requires multiple tools. I'd like to have the ability to use one tool overall. 

We've been using this solution for a few years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We pay a very reasonable, annual licensing fee. 

My recommendation is to just go with this out-of-the-box rule set first. Don't try to tweak them and learn what they mean. First learn what the alerts mean and then slowly tweak it to your specific use cases.

We are using SonarQube for many different reasons, but I was interested more in the security metrics based on the new updates for more particular rules.

The depth features I have found most valuable. You receive a quick comprehensive comparison overview regarding the current release and the last release and what type of depths dependency or duplication should be used. This is going to help you to make a more readable code and have more flexibility for the engineers to understand how things should work when they do not know.

I was more focused on the security aspects and not on quality. SonarQube focuses a lot on security and is going to provide some visibility around that area, but if there could be more focus on team management. For example, what type of remediation is going to be provided when the types of scans are being applied based on different rule sets at the SonarQube level, from the security point of view, this would be helpful.

If there was an official Docker image of SonarQube that could easily integrate into the pipeline would help the user to plug in and plug out and use it directly without any custom configuration. I am not sure if this is being offered already in an update but it would be very helpful.

In an upcoming release of the solution, I would like to see more types of programming languages added and improvement in their SaaS offering to compete better with other enterprise solutions, such as Fortify.

I have been using this SonarQube for approximately four years.

We are not relying on this solution as a go-to application security scanning tool. We use it for some minor enhancement regarding security, but we are using it actively in other departments for the code quality scanning. I have not had any problems using the solution, it has been stable.

We have approximately 15,000 engineers in my company and many of them are using this solution.

I have evaluated Fortify.

I rate SonarQube a six out of ten.

We use it to check the code quality, and the code review to find out the vulnerabilities about the central codes like simplifications and codes. We also use it for security management.

The most valuable feature is the security hotspot feature that identifies where your code is prone to have security issues.

It also gives you a very good highlight of what's changed, and what has to be changed in the future.

Apart from that, there are many other good features as it's a code analytics platform. It also has a dashboard reporting feature, which is very good. I also like the ease of its integration with Jenkins.

Another valuable feature is the time snapshot that it provides for the code. It provides the code quality, the lagging, and the training features like what already has gone wrong and what is likely to go wrong. It's a very good feature for a project to have a dashboard where the users can find everything about their project at a single glance.

There are various standards that are followed. Awareness is a must.

Product awareness is something that I would recommend. If the users are not aware of how to use the product, they won't understand the features.

I have been using SonarQube for three years. 

It is quite stable. There are no kind of issues that we face on SonarQube. It's just about the awareness where the users are not aware of a feature and that's where we need to jump in and explain some of the features about how it works.

It's definitely easy to scale. 

We do contact them based on the project team requirement. We contact them if they have to set up any specific kind of portfolio application and such application et cetera, internal.

Their support is good. They respond quickly. The response time is very good. They answer the queries within 24 to 48 hours. That's a plus for them. It's a very costly product, so we use the enterprise-level product. It does consume a lot of license cost for that.

We used Fortify, it is also another tool for static code analysis. The security team used to use that, but not in our team because ours was a newly assembled team for the work. 

The initial setup is simple. It's basically an orchestration platform on which I manage around 400 SonarQube incentives.

It's a mass production environment. I'm currently managing around 400 plus teams who are using the product. We are trying to migrate it onto Kubernetes.

The setup takes around five to ten minutes as I have created automation. 

It requires maintenance on the platform side, but not on the SonarQube side. Because there is a DB cleanup automatically inbuilt in Sonar, it does not require much to maintain within SonarQube itself.

It eats up a lot of memory. For a stack it's around 2.5GB. We use it on a daily basis. 

Everything is included in the standard licensing. 

Awareness about how to use the product is important. It's a very good product for developers because it gives you timely notifications about where the tool has gone wrong or what could go wrong in the future. That's popular for developers. It's very good for the stats about the product for architects

The metrics are how the budgeting should be done et cetera. These are the things that they can find out from the dashboard based on the lines of codes. 

In the next release, I would like to have notifications because now, it is a bit difficult. I think that's a feature which we could add there and it would benefit the users as well. For every full request, they should be able to see their bugs or vulnerability directly on the surface.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I work for a government agency and we use this tool. It is lightweight and very cost effective as compared to IBM AppScan, but I wouldn't say it's a very good tool for vulnerability assessment. The dashboard is neat and easy to operate and the information on the dashboard makes it easy for the developers to work on. You can have it automated and set up for you to have an automated process every time the code is checked in. 

It definitely helped our organization in hardening the software, the application itself. This is a part of our process now.

The most valuable features are the dashboard reports and the ease of integrating it with Jenkins. 

Although it has Sonar built into it, it is still lacking. Customization features of identifying a particular attack still need to be worked on. To give you an example: if we want to scan and do a false positive analysis, those types of features are missing. If we want to rescan something from a particular point that is a feature that is also missing. It’s in our queue. That will hopefully save a lot of time.

This solution is very stable.

It supports around 25 plus languages.

The technical support is very good. When a product is good, we don't use them as regularly.

No, not that I am aware of.

Compared to other tools, the initial setup was straightforward. The deployment of the tool didn't take long at all. You need to take intrinsic care but setting up this tool is pretty easy. One can do it in a couple of hours. The dashboard is really neat and easy to operate. It gives a lot of information that makes it very easy for the developers. We haven't ever used more than one resource for operations.

We have this implemented in CSAD pipeline as one of the tools for finding bugs in source code. This kind of tool has the capabilities of debugging abnormalities or finding abnormalities. We use it the same as any other static one level detail, and with a few other static tools like AppScan and Checkmarx.

SonarQube is a very good tool. It is lightweight and very cost effective as compared to IBM AppScan. The dashboard is really neat and easy to operate. It gives a lot of information that makes it very easy for the developers. You can get it set up as an automated process every time the code is checked in. I would say, however, that it is not a vulnerability assessment tool. The dev and security team use this solution very closely. Fifteen to twenty people in total use it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The product needs to integrate other security tools for security scanning. 

I have been using the product for a year. 

SonarQube is scalable. My company has 50 users. 

I rate SonarQube an eight out of ten. 

I use the solution for static code analysis and to identify vulnerabilities and code smells.

All the features of the solution are quite good.

New plug-ins should be integrated into SonarCloud to give more flexibility to the product.

I have been using the solution for the last couple of years.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability as an eight out of ten. Currently, not many teams are using the product. We are trying to increase the number of users.

The first time, the initial setup was complicated. It got easier once we got used to it.

The deployment took around one to two hours.

The solution is cheaper than other products.

We have not been able to use the product extensively. I would recommend the solution to others. It'll really help the developers to increase their development speed. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.