We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and SonarQube based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI."
"On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."
"The tool helps us to block IPs and applications."
"The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."
"It offers high performance and improved productivity for users."
"By using a cloud application security solution, our company can save costs by reducing the need for additional security hardware and software and improving operational efficiency."
"The solution offers sophisticated security techniques with unique characteristics that can be particularly valuable for the financial sector, which is where we develop apps."
"Strong code evaluation for budget-minded clients."
"Using SonarQube has helped us to identify areas of technical debt to work on, resulting in better code, fewer vulnerabilities, and fewer bugs."
"We use this solution for qualitative coding. We make use of the SonarLint plugin as well as the dashboard."
"The customizable dashboard and ability to include results and coverage from unit test and other static analysis code tools."
"The good thing with SonarQube is it covers a lot of issues, it's a very robust framework."
"If code coverage is a low number then that's of great value to me."
"Engineers have also learned from the results and have improved themselves as engineers. This will help them with their careers."
"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."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."
"We would like the solution to be more economical since it is not accessible to all clients."
"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."
"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."
"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement."
"We're in the process of figuring out how to automate the workflow for QA audit controls on it. I think that's perhaps an area that we could use some buffing. We're a Kubernetes shop, so there are some things that aren't direct fits, which we're struggling with on the component Docker side. But nothing major."
"The learning curve can be fairly steep at first, but then, it's not an entry-level type of application. It's not like an introduction to C programming. You should know not just C programming and how to make projects but also how to apply its findings to the bigger picture. I've had users who said that they wish it was easier to understand how to configure, but I don't know if that's doable because what it's doing is a very complicated thing. I don't know if it is possible to make a complicated thing trivially simple."
"I would like to see more options for security, beyond the basics like SQL injection."
"Code security could be better. They are already focusing on it, but I see a lot of improvement opportunities over there. I can see a lot of false positives in terms of security. They need to make the tests more accurate so that the false positives are not detected so frequently. It would also help if they provided us with an installer."
"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."
"This solution finds issues that are similar to what is found by Checkmarx, and it would be nice if the overlap could be eliminated."
"We could use some team support, but since we are using the community version, it's not available."
"I think the code security can be improved."
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 11th in Application Security Tools with 30 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 110 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 9.0, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with Checkmarx One, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and Snyk. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. SonarQube report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
