Armor is a cloud and mobile security solution. The vendor’s value proposition is that this solution was purpose-built to deliver the highest level of defense and control for an organization’s critical data, no matter where it’s hosted.
The vendor says they are so confident in the ability of their solution to protect an organization’s data that they back it with their Cyber Warranty Guarantee.
Armor gives you what you need to be successful regardless of technical ability. If you can maintain the systems yourself, you are definitely ahead of the game with their service. If you're not prepared to configure and maintain the systems, they do a pretty good job of getting it set up during the onboarding process so that you don't need to dig into the technical guts too much. If you find yourself in over your head, their support staff can handle it for you in most cases.
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.
Authentication and access against the secure messaging portal is overkill when the response I'm logging in to see merely says, "yes, we have your message. An agent will respond shortly". There should be an option to receive updates like this through email.
The online portal that allows us to clone servers is very slow to respond. More than once I've spun up an additional server due to the lack of visual feedback on the initial request.
The web application firewall does not seem to be sophisticated enough to differentiate between logged in administrators and end users. We use a CMS system which allows admins to create scripts. These often get barred by the WAF even though they are not malicious.
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.
Approximately 50% of all messages we receive are automated. Either that an agent will be assigned, has been assigned, or a ticket is closed. I'd like to see more 'real' interaction, and less box ticking, though I appreciate process has to be followed. That's the one point off. Everything else is very good.
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.
