Carbon Black App Control vs. SonarQube Server

It is more suited to lock down critical systems and servers to prevent unwanted changes, although you can use it on daily basis on laptops and desktops, it needs constant attention and events analysis. For some scenarios i.e. financial institutions it is a must-have solution, as App Control now is a requirement 5 of PCI DSS.

Incentivized

Scenarios where SonarQube is well suited:

1. Large codebase: The tool's static analysis capabilities can help teams quickly identify and fix bugs, vulnerabilities, and code smells in large codebases.
2. Compliance and security: The tool can check the code against industry standards or regulations, such as OWASP and CWE, and identify any issues that need to be addressed.
3. Agile development: SonarQube can be integrated with CI/CD pipelines allowing teams to continuously monitor and improve code quality throughout the development process.
4. Teams using multiple languages: Teams that use multiple programming languages can benefit from using SonarQube, as the tool supports a wide range of languages and can be integrated with a variety of development tools.

Scenarios where SonarQube may be less appropriate:

1. Small codebase: Organizations with a small codebase may not see the full benefits of using SonarQube, as the tool's static analysis capabilities may be overkill for a smaller codebase.
2. Limited resources: Organizations with limited resources may find it difficult to set up and configure SonarQube, as the tool can be complex and may require specialized expertise.
3. Limited integration: Organizations that use development tools or IDEs that are not supported by SonarQube may find it difficult to integrate the tool into their existing development workflow.
4. Limited scalability: Large organizations with millions of lines of code may find SonarQube's performance and scalability to be an issue. It may take longer for the analysis to finish and the results may not be as accurate.

Incentivized

• Device Control - you can view and allow/disallow the ability for certain devices to be used in your environment. Specifically we used this with USB drives. If you have one you want to use - whitelist the serial number. The rest can't be used. Simple and easy.
• Software blocking. If you have an extremely dynamic software base (I doubt this is likely) this could get a bit annoying, but for most organizations like ours where we have specific applications that are required, and then the rest are a bit of an afterthought, it's easy to whitelist the correct applications that you want to be able to run in your environment. The rest can't run (in high enforcement). Users are able to easily request new applications, and you can set certain groups to be able to approve it on their own.
• Solid platform - with few exceptions setting up new software was very easy (Dragon Medical was a bit tricky, but worked through it with support). Once you have your rules set up and the initial setup done, you tend not to have to do much of anything except to update on occasion and deal with a few requests for applications to be unblocked, or publishes approved.

Incentivized

• Generating code quality report
• Calculates junit coverage of the codebase very efficiently and precisely
• Highlights the bugs and vulnerabilities in our codebase
• Informs the user of the improvements which can be done to the code to make it cleaner
• SonarQube also suggests remediation and resolution of the problems it highlights

Incentivized

• More frequently updates of "Software Updaters".
• Possibilities to tag within Yara rules.
• Overall it is the best whitelisting solution I have used.

Incentivized

• It doesn't provide automatic pull request with fixes
• It doesn't provide insights about the libraries of the projects
• The administration management user interface could be simplified
• It doesn't provide an order to fix issues, like archives with more and frequent commits have top priority

Incentivized

It can improve in some user experience and usability parts, like the code view and the way we assign issues it's a bit hidden and not highlighted

Incentivized

We we easily able to integrate the SonarQube steps into our TFS process via the Microsoft Marektplace, we didn't have the need to call SonarQube support. We've used their online documentation and community forum if we ran into any issues.

Incentivized

The big difference between Protect and Barkly/AMP is how exactly it goes about what it's doing. Protect is application whitelisting and program reputation. So the way it's protecting you is using a proprietary reputation service, and hash values to identify applications, and then hitting a list of whitelisted programs to decide if you are able to run that or not, based on the policy you are in. There is a LOT of value in that. We actually are working on transitioning to Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP). The main reason is cost (about the same cost as Cb Protect, but with (most of) the featureset of all 3 Carbon Black products for less than 1/3 of the total spend. AMP works differently, looking at a reputation service powered by Cisco's Talos cloud. You don't really have application whitelisting, but that also reduces how many "requests" you get for applications. So I'll have to find a different way to do whitelisting and USB blocking and the like, but I'm getting more visibility across my network and also built in antivirus (TETRA engine - ClamAV with some work). Barkly is an add that we are looking to put in as it looks at behavior of programs. So specifically it watches for privilege elevation and the like. Thus far all the big name problem children (WannaCry, other ransomware problems) have been caught natively in Barkly day 0.

Incentivized

SonarQube identifies significant more thing compared to the built-in suggestions in IntelliJ IDEA. The suggestions how to correct issues are also a lot better with SonarQube. IntelliJ IDEA provides great refactoring support to make it easy to refactor the code to solve issues. We use these tools together and they really complement each other.

Incentivized

• Dashboards are easy to understand for management
• We feel more secure than we were on our previous platform

Incentivized

• Positive ROI from the standpoint of flagging several issues that would have otherwise likely been unaddressed and caused more time to be spent closer to launch
• Slightly positive ROI from time-saving perspective (it's an automated check which is nice, but depending on the issues it finds, can take developers time to investigate and resolve)