We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and GitHub 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."The UI is very intuitive and simple to use."
"It shows in-depth code of where actual vulnerabilities are."
"Apart from software scanning, software composition scanning is valuable."
"The solution allows us to create custom rules for code checks."
"The best thing about Checkmarx is the amount of vulnerabilities that it can find compared to other free tools."
"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."
"The most valuable features of Checkmarx are the automation and information that it provides in the reports."
"Our static operation security has been able to identify more security issues since implementing this solution."
"The most valuable features are GitHub are the standard features, they are very useful."
"Any complex banking can be handled very easily in GitHub. It allows us to integrate with tools like Grid, where we can merge and resolve conflicts without any hassle."
"GitHub's merging feature is much better than that of other products because merging is done daily."
"The product has a very user-friendly interface and user-friendly security."
"I did not have any issues with the stability of Github. It worked seamlessly."
"We can make a private repository."
"We use GitHub as a repository."
"I like the CI/CD features."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"We can run only one project at a time."
"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
"The integration could improve by including, for example, DevSecOps."
"Some of the descriptions were found to be missing or were not as elaborate as compared to other descriptions. Although, they could be found across various standard sources but it would save a lot of time for developers, if this was fixed."
"It provides us with quite a handful of false positive issues. If Checkmarx could reduce this number, it would be a great tool to use."
"Checkmarx could improve the speed of the scans."
"If something has to be moved into approvals, and if they don't approve it in a few hours, then they should move the approval request to some other user, or they should have a way to escalate it."
"I cannot recall coming across any shortcomings of the product."
"We want to incorporate management comments within GitHub, making it more like a product management tool. We haven't done that yet. Another change we're considering is migrating from GitHub to Azure DevOps, especially now that Microsoft has introduced it."
"The solution can improve by adding video guides, official guides, or short courses that cater to beginners who are new to the system. These resources could offer step-by-step guidance on how to use GitHub, including common procedures such as pulling and committing. Currently, many of us have to resort to searching for information on how to do these tasks via Google. An official guide provided by GitHub itself would be a valuable asset to newcomers and would save them time and effort."
"Though I haven't done much research, GitHub lacks in providing more functions like GitLab."
"The solution could have better support for the Markdown language."
"There is room for improvement in terms of interface."
"The security point should be addressed in the next release and scaling is also an issue."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while GitHub is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 74 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while GitHub is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and GitLab, whereas GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Fortify on Demand, Bitbucket and IBM Rational ClearCase. See our Checkmarx One vs. GitHub 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.
