When it comes to securing your code, don’t settle for Vera-bad, Vera-inaccurate and Vera-inefficient testing results. Veracode security testing falls flat in several areas:
Fails to scale: Veracode customers face major challenges as they mature in their DevSecOps journeys, but the contract and the platform keep them locked in, making it difficult to grow according to their growth requirements.
False-positive overload: Veracode is quick to set forth its proof of value (PoV). But what it doesn’t warn you about is that its technology finds a lot of false positives/false negatives. Beyond that, it fails to prioritize its findings or to offer specific guidance on how to remediate.
Takes almost a year to remediate: Veracode’s own published data says that its average time to remediate with Static Application Security Testing (SAST) is 298 days and with Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) is 305. Imagine if your No. 1 concern is security, and you have to wait almost a year for vulnerabilities to be mitigated?
It doesn’t have to be this way. You don’t have to be frustrated with your code scanning. Instead, you can trust Contrast to provide application security that improves your security posture across your entire Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC). You can see the results for yourself:
