Snyk vs. Coverity Static Analysis (SAST)

Scenarios Where Snyk Is Well-Suited CI/CD Pipeline Integration (Node.js, Python, etc.) Container Security Open Source License Compliance Infrastructure as Code (IaC) SecurityScenarios Where Snyk May Be Less Appropriate Scanning Proprietary or Custom Code for Unknown Vulnerabilities Complex Monorepos with Custom Build Tools Organizations Requiring Custom Security Rules Advanced Security Teams Needing Correlation and Deep Triage.

Best suits for large scale and dynamic development environment. It may be best tool if you want to release your apps with less TAT. However if you have a CRM tool which is COTS product it can offer little help. Even then you should be familiar with what features of Coverity Static Analysis (SAST) are helpful for your development environment

Incentivized

• Helps in dependency management
• SAST - Static Application Security Testing
• Infra Code Scan ( Terraform , Cloud Formation , Docker image scan)
• OSSG

Incentivized

• It can provide security scanning dashboard
• Help detect vulnerabilities and recommend remediation
• Integration of devsecops helps speed up release cycles

Incentivized

• Setting up is complex and when not do no properly provides too many false positives.
• We use another tool in parallel because it does not cover all of our languages especially for older code that is in mixed languages.
• Integrating it with bitbucket was not straight forward.

Incentivized

• Coverage of integration with other security tools can be improved
• Customisation of dashboard to enable customer choice of tracking
• Showcase devsecops progressive tasks from SLA and violation from code scanner perspective

Incentivized

Developer-Centric Design - Snyk integrates directly into IDEs (like VS Code and IntelliJ), CI/CD pipelines, GitHub/GitLab, and container registries. Clear, Actionable Vulnerability report issues are categorized by severity.


Reports include fix recommendations, pull request suggestions, and links to remediation advice.

Unfortunately, neither cover all of the use cases that we would like so we need to use both but they are both excellent tools as part of our vulnerability management. We find that Snyk helps us better with improving our MTTR of identified vulnerabilities when compared to inspector but that may be more based on how we have implemented both tools

Incentivized

Coverity Static Analysis (SAST) has wide coverage in terms of Owasp Top 10 vulnerabilities, various types of languages, backward integration. While other tools offer similar experience of code scanning, coverity helps in pointed recommendations for quick closure of vulnerabilities. The historical analysis of vulnerabilities is a good value add in understanding which type of code and which language is better in improving cyber security maturity.

Incentivized

• Nothing big on our specific projects.

• Helped reduce efforts of development team avoiding rework
• Increased security maturity
• Increased efficiency of the teams

Incentivized