SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) Reviews

We primarily use this solution for code quality purposes. We have a CICD environment, without a lot of manual steps.

This solution figures out and tells you when there are code quality issues.

The quantification and reporting features are really good. 

The security portion of this solution needs to be improved. They do have a few rules, but I don't think that they are of much use because you cannot position it as a security scanner. I think that there is a lot more that can be done in the security space. I would like to see, for example, more security updates as part of the scan.

The reporting is good, but I am not able to download a specific report as a PDF, so downloading reports is something that should be looked at.

We would like to be able to perform differential scans for a few modules or a few lines, rather than for the whole source code each time. 

We have been using this for quite a number of applications, and its stability is very good. The scan time is very fast because it is a text-based scan.

We have not had any problems with scalability. We have a big organization with a lot of applications and all of our critical applications are on this platform. We are planning to increase the scope by adding less critical applications over time.

We were using some other products, but not on an enterprise level. There were several locally developed applications, but when we tried to consolidate all of these into an enterprise-level solution, we opted for this.

The initial setup was not complex. It is pretty simple and straightforward.

The costs for this application, for the kind of job it does, are pretty decent.

This product is good but it is not meant to be a single solution for all issues.

If you want to have your code scanned and timed then this is a good tool. If you want security to be part of it then you may need multiple tools. Overall, my advice is to use this tool in areas where it is strong.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

I'm a software development engineer and we are customers of SonarQube. 

SonarQube does SAST and SCAs pretty well. One of the important things for me, something that is different from a solution like Checkmarx, was that SonarQube had SonarLint that we can use for local scanning for developers. The product does well in scanning and vulnerability.  

SonarQube is missing specific SAST capabilities. In addition, when we have security issues we want to mitigate those and it seems that SonarQube doesn't persist with the mitigation. Each time it discovered a new scan it wiped out all the persistence that we had mitigated for previous vulnerabilities. Dynamic scanning is missing and there are issues with security scanning in terms of failing projects where it didn't pass a scan.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

The solution is quite stable. 

We don't have contact with technical support, any issues are solved by our operation team.

The initial setup wasn't too complicated. We have a number of teams of developers and around 150 users together with an operations team who maintain the infrastructure. From a user perspective we scan at least once a day. 

I looked at Checkmarx but it wasn't as straightforward as SonarQube because it's only supporting Linux and maybe Windows, but I wasn't able to find any local scanning support for Mac computers, and that was an issue. I'd like to learn more about Checkmarx. 

I would suggest looking at the pipelines and understanding usage scenarios in terms of what the customer is looking for. For instance, the mitigation persistence through the life cycle of a project is not there. For me, it's like a lack of tracking records of what to mitigate. It's something that you thought would be a part of the basics, but it's not there.

I think there's about 40% of the features I'd like to see that are missing in SonarQube, so I'd rate it a six out of 10.  

Our primary use case is to provide more coverage and reduce the reliance on code reviews alone. It also provides confidence and helps begin a path towards continuous improvement.

This has improved our process because it allows us to pick up on a lot of the smaller best practices that might otherwise be missed, in addition to ensuring code quality is not compromised between builds.

The most valuable features are the wide array of languages, multiple languages per project, the breakdown of bugs, and the description of vulnerabilities and code smells (best practices).

A robust credential scanner would be a huge bonus as it would remove the need for yet another niche product with additional cost, also gives the benefit of a single pane of glass view, although we still need white source bolt for 3rd part library scanning. The integration into docker builds could be better as pulling the latest version of the scanner, setting the path and then invoking the scan is an extra overhead to manage between versions of the scanner. An apt-get and scan start with the key passed as a variable would be a nicer implementation. Have not looked into SSL for the management page yet but hoping that goes smoothly.

We have only used this solution for a few weeks, but so far we have had no issues at all.

My impression of the scalability is good, as it appears that it can support a much larger number of projects than we have.

We have had no need to contact technical support.

I did not use another solution prior to this one.

The setup took a bit of work, but that was because we were combining Docker, Kubernetes, Azure Key Vault, and the Azure PaaS SQL Server.

We took care of the implementation in-house.

In terms of ROI, it is difficult to put a number against code quality. For the cost of hosting it, I would say very good if you do not have a solution to start with.

A self-hosted SonarQube on a Kubernetes cluster is very cost efficient if you already have the infrastructure and don’t need the premium features.

We evaluated the Checkmark Software Exposure Platform and Veracode, but they were expensive for a first go.

We are using SonarQube for code reviews. 

Code quality improvement, Secure coding pracitices 

The most valuable feature of SonarQube I have found to be the configuration that has allowed us to can make adjusts to the demands of the code review. It gives a specified classification regarding the skill, prioritization, and it is easy for me to review and make my code.

NA

I have been using SonarQube for approximately five years.

The solution is stable.

I have not needed to use technical support.

Positive

I have used some tools previously, such as Eclipse and Checkmarx. I used some tools directly linked with Eclipse, but SonarQube is much better. It has a better ability to link with Eclipse as well as the standalone features for a code review I have found the SonarQube most efficient.

I deployed SonarQube on my laptop. I found it to be straightforward and easy. I wanted my technical team to do implement it but since they didn't have time I took the initiative and did it myself. I am not exactly from a technical background, and it was very easy for me.

The time it took for me to do the whole process was approximately two hours because I had to download, read the documentation, and do the configurations.

The solution does not require any maintenance.

SonarQube fits my purpose. It doesn't cause any hassles for me.

I rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

We are a $4 billion valuation large company and we use the solution for status security, scanning, and code quality. I am currently in the process of building a pipeline for one of my customers and for that we are utilizing this solution for the static analysis.

The fact that the solution does security scanning is valuable. This is primarily why we use it. For code quality, we could utilize other tools, such as unit test coverage, which it gives you too, but having a more comprehensive tool is useful.

Having a tool that is comprehensive in nature is very useful because otherwise, we have to run through multiple tools in order to get the entire viewpoint of a particular set of code. For example, we use SonarQube in combination with Nexus, which is another product that gives us some other information. I guess when it comes to the gamut of things that we are looking for including static code quality, static testing, and dynamic testing of security. Having performance regression would be a helpful add on or ability to be able to do during the scan. 

In an upcoming release, I would like to see the dynamic security testing feature available. I would like to point out that they could already offer this feature but I have not been that deep into the solution to know yet.

I have been using the solution for approximately one year.

I have not run into any bugs or glitches. However, I have only been using it for a short time.

The pipeline that I am currently building is being used by the platforms team, which is approximately three people. We use the solution as part of the automated code review process. As far as a larger perspective of who is actually benefiting from it, the development team is about 35 people.

I have not needed to use technical support.

The set up was very easy.

I would recommend to those wanting to implement this solution to read the documentation, they are clear and easy to follow.

I rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

SonarQube can be used for any missing components or component vulnerabilities.

Sonarqube has improved our best practice of pair programming that aligned with the CI pipeline.

The product has a friendly UI that is easy to use and understand. Especially, the admin's control panel is very good and It's not really difficult to get through the settings.

With minimal coding experience, we can build many rules that apply for each programming language, for example, CSS, and Java. You can easily set up rules. We are luckily able to do this with the community version.

With other community versions, you are not always allowed to customize the profile for example. With the SonarQube Community Edition, it's authorized.

Since we are using the community version, we have had some issues. For example, we have had some difficulties with the Single Sign-On (SSO) login. We tried to integrate with our Azure ID to have access to login, but it doesn't always update. We have to search for more forums, or in other communities for technical IT.

The documentation is not clear and it needs to be updated. As it is the community version we don't have team support and rely on the documentation that is available. We are creating more disciplines to do peer reviews on SonarQube. There is time spent on creating the tools but not the documentation that is needed for support.

It takes time to configure and create profiles. We need to improvise the way we introduce new tools.

We have only integrated the source code, but there are things that are not being utilized because it is product-driven and there needs to be more path and delivery.

Since we are now certified, we are utilizing more and we are creating an environment for security. We need more emphasis on the security side.

Support needs to improve with their response time.

There is a lack of local partners/vendors in our region and we are having difficulties finding vendors looking for another partner.

In the next release, I would like to see some automation scripts. At times by default, you have to configure some of the rules in the detection. You need some parameters to be set that define the source code, such as those required to eliminate a false positive.

They advance their product without addressing security or internal codes.

SonarQube has been in place for one year, but we have only been using it for the last three months.

It's a scalable product. We have approximately 40 users.

We have contacted support but it's not mandatory operating support and takes some time to get a reply.

We have not used any other solution, but we did some comparisons and decided to go with SonarQube because it was open-source.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It takes a week to complete the deployment.

We are using the open-source community version, but there are enterprise licenses available.

I am a user of SonarQube and I am responsible for the information security.

I'm the principle of security in the office. I advise others of enhancing and incorporating security aspects into the IP.

We are currently using the community version. We are not quite ready for the licensed version as we need more discipline for our developers to do it correctly. Our team is growing, now we will need behavior discipline of security, and then we can upgrade the license. We have passed the ISO certificate and encourage the use of tools for peer reviews for the developers.

It is better to have a technical review before deployment to production. Developers must review before going into production.

It's a great tool but you have to have a good project plan before being introduced to the tools. For us, it is unfortunate that SonarQube was introduced at the end of the project phase, and the team is still having to learn it.

Before introducing any application tools, know the visibility of the project.

I would recommend using the SonarQube open-source version to get used to it before purchasing the license. Before we go with an enterprise product, we have to know the terms and how things are done to run software quality. We had reached out to sales support and asked for the enterprise license as a trial but unfortunately, we had to halt the program.

It's also a part of corporate policy to know everything before it is published into the CI pipeline.

There are other alternatives that provide end-to-end analysis from the static, dynamic, interactive, and SaaS.

I would recommend SonarQube to be on your initial plan for perfect quality.

I would rate SonarQube an eight out of ten.

We are a security organization, and we deploy security solutions and applications related to network for our clients. We mostly focus on open source products because clients don't like to have proprietary products because of the available budget for their different projects. We try to find the possible solution, and then we deploy the solution for them. Deployments are done on the AWS cloud as well as on-premises.

I came to know that there is a SonarQube solution that is used for clean and secure coding purposes and bug fixes in a large DevOps team. That's why I have deployed SonarQube. Currently, I'm testing SonarQube to demonstrate to my higher department what this tool can do. We are testing this solution for one of our clients, who may use it for two or three use cases during static code analysis and the software development life cycle. 

It's a great product. If you are in a hurry and just want to focus on the functional requirements of any kind of project, SonarQube is highly helpful. It enables the developers to code securely. 

SonarQube has a Community edition, which is open source and free. There are also three proprietary or paid versions: Enterprise edition, Data Center edition, and Developer edition. 

If I configure a project in SonarQube, it generates a token. When we're compiling our code with SonarQube, we have to provide the token for security reasons. If IP-based connectivity is established with the solution, the project should automatically be populated without providing any additional token. It will be easy to provide just the IP address. It currently supports this functionality, but it makes a different branch in the project dashboard.

From the configuration and dashboard point of view, it should have some transformations. There can be dashboard integration so that we can configure the dashboard for different purposes. 

It has been just three days since I deployed this solution. I have just configured the Community edition of SonarQube, and now I am searching for some Java products to test the solution. 

I have previously created a report comparing SonarQube with other products such as Micro Focus Fortify. SonarQube is way ahead than Micro Focus Fortify because SonarQube has a cloud solution. Micro Focus Fortify does not support cloud-based hosting.

The initial setup was simple for me. It was very straightforward and to the point. The documentation was also very much to the point and perfectly explained.

There are open source solutions for the Linux environment that let you automatically deploys everything in the new environment by using a specific file, but SonarQube doesn't have that file. That would be a plus point.

I deployed it myself. Because of our Linux environment, it took me around three hours. I was reading the documentation and learning about configuration-related parameters while deploying this solution.  

For the Community edition, there is no extra cost. It's totally free. The Enterprise edition, Data Center edition, and Developer edition are the paid versions. 

We have already used SonarLint. I am considering both SonarLint and SonarQube.

I always talk in favor of secure programming, secure coding. SonarQube is easy for me. I am recruiting buggy code with this, and it is reporting. It shows that this code should not be like this and the reason for it. For example, it shows that you should declare a static function, or why you should or should not initialize a variable. This is an amazing feature. I am enjoying testing SonarQube, but I don't know what is the feedback from a developer's point of view.

I highly recommend SonarQube. I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

We are using the free version of the SonarQube product. Be warned if you choose this version because it is lacking some of the capabilities and support. It is for this reason that we are currently considering migrating to a commercial solution.  

The main factor that makes the product valuable for us is that it is free because budget is always an issue. We do not have to pay for it, but there are many cons to using a free product at times. It is a very good tool even if it is free. The dashboard and the media that it provides are all quite helpful.  

We are always using SonarQube. But currently, we were trying to evaluate some more tools because Sonar in the free version has around 10 to 15 languages. If we go to the commercial version, they support 27 languages and there are a lot of limitations in the resources for traditional support which is not available for the free license users of Sonar.  

Integration is there with most of the tools, but we do not have full integration with the free version. That is why we were planning to go ahead and plan to work with some other commercial tools. But as a whole, Sonar will do what we need it to.  

Integration could be better in SonarQube in the free version. It does not have any bug tracking tool, like Jira. They are not integrated with enough additional programming tools.  

There is one issue with the dashboard. The dashboard which is there is okay. But sometimes if we have to work on multiple issues the application is giving us errors. Say we have five issues. All five issues might not be very important, so in cases where there are multiple issues, we would just want it to give us a warning about the important issue. It may be we will get to work on the things of greater importance and over-all have a better solution and we do not have to fix all five. Something like that would be good to help us to prioritize things so then we do not have to go into all the issues and fix them.  

We do have this categorization for major and minor issues, but let's say, again, if there are five major issues. I would like to maybe get a score involving the prioritization of these. Out of these five major issues, we should know which issue should be fixed first. This would give us a backup for planning and organizing the prioritization. It is that kind of data that we do not get on the dashboard. If we could, that would be helpful to give priority to the correct issues.  

We have been using SonarQube for maybe for a year or so. A little more than that.  

The stability is good. We are not having problems with the product failing.  

The stability of SonarQube is good. The scaling part is the problem. We cannot scale to all the other products that we want to use and we cannot improve and scale to other languages.  

The language issue is one that we are facing. If you want to use some languages like maybe tool languages or something people want to use, they are not all available in Sonar. In the commercial version of Sonar they may be available. But the free version, there are some limitations.  

So we do understand the limitations of the scalability. The free tool comes with its own advantages and disadvantages and limitations on scalability is one of the disadvantages.  

We do not really have very much contact at all with technical support because SonarQube quite user friendly and intuitive. Technical support is not actually available with the free product, but we do have access to community tools online.   

There was this one issue that we had where we had raised a question in the community. We found that if we scanned our project with SonarLint and if we scanned our project with SonarQube, it was giving some different results. SonarQube was showing some issues and SonarLint was not showing any issues at all. There was a clear difference in the report. But when we Googled this issue and looked on the support web site, we found now that SonarLint does not give you the errors around integration. When it comes to SonarQube, it automatically integrates with other processes and scans your port to that. SolarLint does not do this in the same way. This is why SonarQube might give you some errors that SolarLint does not.  

So we are not in contact the company support. When there are times when we do have an issue, we see what we can Google or the SonarQube community. Usually, we do find out our answers.  

The initial setup is quite straightforward. The setup process is very reasonable as far as it is logical and very simple. It doesn't take much time.  

We are using Sonar, and we also evaluated Checkmarx. The version of Sonar we are using is the free version of it. Checkmarx is quite a bit different and more helpful compared to Sonar. There are a lot of features missing in the free version of SonarQube that I want to have that already exist in Checkmarx.  

Anyone considering SonarQube should initially start with a free trial and then start doing an evaluation. If you have a list of target requirements which you are looking for and you can accomplish these things with Sonar, then you can go ahead and use Sonar. If you are looking for something for diving more deeply into your application security, then you can possibly start with it and scale it or use some other complementary tools. If you want to see your reports, and how your development is performing, Sonar is the best tool, I think.  

On a scale from one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate SonarQube as a seven-out-of-ten.