Checkmarx vs. Salt Security API Protection Platform

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

Salt is highly recommended for anyone who wants to discover, monitor and protect their APIs against various types of attacks. Salt should not be used as a SIEM.

• Detects security vulnerabilities in source code with accuracy and detail.
• Integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, IDEs, and repositories.
• Provides clear reports and actionable fix recommendations for developers.

Incentivized

• PII identification in API traffic.
• Divergence between API traffic and documentation (swagger files).
• Potential attacks with information to take counter measures.

• Scan duration
• False positives
• Integration with other tools like Jenkins comes with some inconveniences.

Incentivized

• The platform could have more options for exporting detailed data from attackers' dashboards.
• The Attackers dashboard could also have more options of filters in order to support the investigations of the attack.
• The OAS analysis could present a more detailed view of the found issues.

Their API based customizations which I leveraged to create an ASPM package, which is developer friendly and can extend above the dashboard features, other ones are UI which is great and feels clutter free. Menu and navigation is also good so as support. Only drawback is sometimes scan takes longer which I feel so can be reduced

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

We tried controls offered by the IaaS providers but these were hard to manage and did not provide the visibility we wanted. We also protected APIs with a normal WAF but this was only helpful for assets we knew about and API attacks were not caught by the WAF.

• Improved ability to provide high level of IA confidence
• Improved confidence in application-level security

Incentivized

• Salt Security API Protection Platform has provided detailed information that is helping us to identify and investigate attacks in our environment