Checkmarx vs. Sonatype Platform

Chechmarx is really suited for finding wide range of security risks. It although identifies false positives which can be confusing at times. It can do better in terms of scan duration. They are better alternate competitors in the market who can do equally good or even better. It all depends on the scope of the problem you want to address

Incentivized

For a medium to large size organization with the possibility to setup a central support team to support the governance, maintenance and implementation of the Sonatype Platform, the product suite from Sonatype is very well suited. Setting up detailed configurations requires quite some effort and deep understanding of the Sonatype Platform. Whenever needed the support teams from Sonatype are available for technical and functional support. As well the Innovate platform of Sonatype offers customers to interact on specific topics and set up customer reference calls.

• Reporting
• Language support
• Fix recommendations

Incentivized

• Nexus firewall is a great feature enabled for all our proxy repositories which are used to download the third-party opensource packages.
• Nexus IQ is integrated with build stage to analyze the component against evaluation policy. This helps to figure out the application security standards.
• Nexus IQ is also having a feature to scan container images before it uploads to our private repository. This is great feature for container platforms.

• Lots of false positives
• Hard to integrate with CI

Incentivized

• Recommendations for best Energy Consumption options based on existing BOM - e.g. replace component X with component Y to reduce CPU cycles.
• More specific recommendations regarding Open Source Licensing - not just saying "Copyleft" but the next level of analysis (it's difficult - but would save a lot of time)
• Provide specific component replacement options where no "next version" resolves a high severity vulnerability.

Incentivized

Sonatype supports more than 200 dev(s). It proves with the repository to store the artifacts. Allows for governance of open source software used by the different teams. It is used by security teams to scan for vulnerabilities in software(s) and in the deployed containers. It helps ensure code quality.

Incentivized

Monthly touchpoints with Sinisa has been very valuable.

Incentivized

We actually use Checkmarx along with the other tools. However, the reason we chose Checkmarx is its wide support for languages and useful fix recommendations. The flowcharts help better understand the data flow and give a clear picture of what needs to be fixed and how. Also, developers can make a note of what should be avoided in the future. Overall, it's a great tool and would be a good investment to make.

Incentivized

Out of other products we evaluated before choosing Sonatype, the later looked far more user friendly, easy to understand and work with. This was key for us, as the tool needs to be used by many engineers that don't have security as their main focus. Having a tool that is easy to understand and work with, makes the process of evaluating open source dependencies much easier and appealing for developers.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

• Sonatype's centralized management of artifacts have made it very easy for developers to share code in an efficient manner.
• Sonatype's low false positive rate has made it easier to convince developers to remediate vulnerabilities
• Sonatype's archaic architecture has made it more expensive to manage than it could be.