Checkmarx vs. Upsource

If you are going with SAST process or want to improve overall security posture then go for it like integrating it with post deployment steps. If you are more concerned about proactive controls better choose other options such as pee-commit hooks and CI security. Also choose other tools for DAST and API scans.

Incentivized

Upsource is the best review tool we've found but it still has some flaws. Notably, it makes reviewing small and quick changes less convenient than they need to be, and diff viewing (especially collaboratively) can be tedious.

It does handle larger, iterative reviews well. Especially when using a feature branch, Upsource will track that branch and automatically add all commits to the review. You can then review the branch as a whole, or look at a subset of diffs.

Incentivized

• Supports a large number of languages
• Finds a large variety of potential risks

Incentivized

• Automatically watch git repositories
• Track all commits in a branch in a single commit
• Integrates with build server to report build status of specific commits when looking at reviews/commits
• Integrates with JetBrains IDEs
• Ability for reviewers to add comments inline and require comments to be resolved before approval
• Built in diff viewer, both stacked and side-by-side

Incentivized

• DAST capability can be the one where it does not support native use case of using OTP based arch
• API Scanning is something that lacks a bit due to not much customizations
• Branch wise reports for SAST is not available

Incentivized

• Creating and closing reviews isn't as quick as it could be. You must create a review, assign reviewers, approve and close. I wish there would be a quick review-approve-close for a commit where the change is simple and doesn't require multiple review iterations.
• Web based interface can be clunky, especially when looking at big diffs side-by-side
• JetBrains IDE integration is somehow less convenient than going using it in browser.

Incentivized

Checkmarx's usability is generally good, but it can be a bit complex for new users. The interface may take some time to get used to, especially for those unfamiliar with security tools. Once you become familiar with it, it’s effective and integrates well into development workflows.

Incentivized

Checkmarx is easier to integrate with development tools and gives quick feedback during coding, which is helpful for developers. Veracode is more focused on scanning and reporting for compliance, but it’s more complex to set up. We chose Checkmarx because it fits better into our development process, offering faster scans and more useful suggestions for fixing problems

Incentivized

Compared to the other tools we evaluated, Upsource was the only tool that allowed distinct reviews without needing explicit pull requests while still being able to go in-depth when required. The diff viewer is serviceable and better than the alternatives, as well, especially the side-by-side viewer.

Incentivized

• Great diversity of vulnerabilities covered.
• Quicker scans
• They are feature rich compared to other tools I used in the past.
• Dashboards are not customizable enough.
• High number of false positives take up time and sometimes make our report look bad.

Incentivized

• Increased our code base quality
• Reduced the number of bugs found after deployment (bugs are found in review and fixed before deploy)
• Improved knowledge sharing

Incentivized