We performed a comparison between Seeker and SonarQube based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
"We consider it a handy tool that helps to resolve our issues immediately."
"The tool helps us to monitor and manage violations. It manages the bugs and security violations."
"The solution is stable."
"Provides local scanning for developers."
"We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. ]"
"SonarQube has a lot of value, it reviews the basic coding standards and security vulnerabilities of code that help to reduce issues."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"The software quality gate streamlines the product's quality."
"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
"There could be better integration with other products."
"There is need for support for the additional languages and ease of use in adding new rules for detecting issues."
"I would like to see improvements in defining the quality sets of rules and the quality to ensure code with low-performance does not end up in production."
"Ease of use/interface."
"The tool needs to be more compatible with C/C++ language"
"We had some issues scanning the master branch but when we upgraded to version 7.9 we noticed it does scan the master branch but we had to do a workaround for it to happen. This process could be improved in a future release."
"I think the code security can be improved."
"Our developers have complained about the Quality Gates and the number of false positives that this product reports."
Seeker is ranked 25th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 1 review while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 112 reviews. Seeker is rated 7.0, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Seeker writes "More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities". 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". Seeker is most compared with Synopsys API Security Testing, Coverity, Contrast Security Assess, Polaris Software Integrity Platform and Checkmarx One, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and GitHub Advanced Security.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
