SonarQube Reviews

I am now working in a consultancy company and I work with different clients in different industries. For this reason I implement, for example, a delivery pipeline with the process whereby we need to validate the quality gate of the quality code. Meaning, the developer creates the unit testing and the code coverage, but grants the code coverage for a specific person. In other cases, we used to see what the technical depth was to see if if there are any bugs in the applications - the web application, mobile application and different languages, like, C-Sharp, JavaScript or Java, et cetera.

We deploy SonarQube on-premise on a Linux server and our pipelines were created with GitLab and Azure DevOps. Meaning that Azure DevOps and GitLab are the tools that do the build and release process.

We use Microsoft Azure and Google Cloud Platform a little.

In terms of most valuable feature, when you compute SonarQube you need to install an extension. This extension depends on the version control. You need to install different extensions or work with a specific language to use as the extensions, all of which I work in with different projects.

In terms of what can be improved, the areas that need more attention in the solution are its architecture and development.

Additionally, the QA team also needs work in different aspects. When you think about the support area - when the support team has an incident they need to do a hostage. When they do that they do a commit in the version control. These commits trigger a new build process and this process needs validation from SonarQube because we need to validate the quality of the software product for different cases and different aspects.

I have been using SonarQube for about four years, with different versions.

SonarQube works very well, but I prefer SonarCloud because the tendency of the technology world is to think less about the structure and more about the process and the value that this process provides.

In terms of scalability, with proper configuration and deployment, there is higher availability.

I have companies with 20 users and I have customers with 100 users. We work with a big company in Chile and in some cases national companies, in other cases international companies. With the international companies the majority of them are more than 1,000 users.

I have a technical DevOps team. The majority of the time we implement the trial version so that we show the value of the tool to our clients and they understand about the pricing and the cost of the tool.

It depends on the maturity of the company. In some case, we have companies that don't know about SonarQube so we deploy it to show the value. In other cases we have clients with no SonarQube experience but they know the quality of the codes. In this case we provide a license. In the majority of the cases we provide the license or the subscription for SonarCloud. Other clients get access to SonarQube directly.

I have never used technical support from the SonarQube support team.

I work very well with the documentation you find on the internet.

The initial setup is straightforward the majority of time. It takes about two hours.

I work in a consultancy company so we do the implementation. We deploy for our customers.

We did evaluate other options, for example Q1 and Veracode. In specific cases we created different aspects with different tools and these were the top peers that we would compare it to - Q1 and Veracode.

In terms of differences, Veracode is used more for the security of the development and you can configure the gates while thinking about software security and things like that. With Q1, the difference is the type of the license. In Q1 you have projects and you pay for the line. I know that SonarQube was changing the licensing plan. Right now, before you pay for a license, you pay for fair lines that you extend. This is the difference between these three tools.

I do recommend SonarQube because it is an easy tool that you can deploy and configure. After that you can measure the history of your obligation and integrate it with other tools like GitLab or GitHub or Azure DevOps to do quality code analysis.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give SonarQube an eight. To give it a 10 and not an eight, I would like to see architecture development and the QA area improved.

We use SonarQube to help with our software development and testing. At the moment, we're mainly using it for static analysis and code inspection. We have an on-premises server and we connect to it from there.

Our main use case is testing software for security weaknesses, but we also use it to help eliminate code smells and to make sure our code is compliant with established coding standards.

SonarQube lets us find security issues during development and testing so that we can release more secure and higher quality applications.

Apart from the security point of view, I like that it makes it easy to detect code smells and other issues in terms of code quality and standards.

From a reporting perspective, we sometimes have problems interpreting the vulnerability scan reports. For example, if it finds a possible threat, our analysts have to manually check the provided reports, and sometimes we have issues getting all the data needed to properly verify if it's accurate or not.

This is especially important when considering false positives, and often we have issues getting all the necessary information from SonarQube in order to determine whether it is a true vulnerability or a false positive.

Another suggestion for improvement is that SonarQube could be better when it comes to integration with different development pipelines for continuous monitoring. For example, whether you are scanning manually or on-demand, we would like more ways to integrate SonarQube into our pipeline so that we can get reports quickly and automatically as we work.

I have been using SonarQube for about two years now.

I have not run into major issues or bugs and it works well when it comes to stability.

I don't think we have had any problem with traffic or things like that. 

I don't have experience with SonarQube support because we do it all ourselves. 

I have not used any other similar solutions in the past. SonarQube is the first of its kind in my experience.

It's quite easy to set up, not too complex.

The development license cost is reasonable, and we've had no concerns about SonarQube when it comes to cost.

Personally, I can't compare it to other similar solutions like Fortify, but SonarQube does a good job when it comes to making sure our code is compliant with standards and free of any obvious security weaknesses. 

I would rate SonarQube a six out of ten.

We decided to implement the solution to keep up to date with testing, security, and other issues with developments, such as bugs.

In regards to features, overall the product is good. It minimizes the difficulty or issues that we encountered during the production. We are using the open-sourced version and issues can easily be resolved.

I have been using the solution for four to five years.

We are using everything that is open-source and this allows us when we have the regular day to day issues, our team works on them directly to identifying their causes and they resolve them quickly.

We have our internal team that is very knowledgeable, experienced, and have extreme abilities that handle our needs.

I think comparing the product to competitors it should be less expensive.

I would recommend SonarQube. It is a good deal compared to all other tools on the market.  It certainly helped us, it is a good tool and should be definitely used.

I rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

We are using this solution for analyzing sales, profit, and FI documents. We are using the HR section as well.

SonarQube simplified some of the processes and made others more complex.

The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files. Ability to manage and customize reports. Sonar also models the relationship between packages and classes

It would be better if the users could have quick access to the features.

Monitoring is a feature that can be improved in the next version.

I have been using SonarQube for three years.

This solution is stable. Stability is not an issue for us.

It's scalable. Scaling is not a problem.

Because of the sanctions in our country, we cannot contact technical support directly.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was a normal installation.

It took approximately five days to deploy.

It's a bit expensive for us. The currency rate of the dollar is a problem but it may be fine for other countries.

This solution provides good features for users.

Before implementing, they should have more knowledge about the performance, and the features. It will be helpful in learning the hardware also.

If you have good resources for the performance, you won't worry about it. It will also be dependent on your information, and how much knowledge you have.

I would rate SonarQube an eight out of ten.

We usually do the development in Java, and when we finish the development, we usually run the SonarQube tests and review the critical level, bugs, and security issues. We also review the license and the web issues and try to solve them, and then pass again through SonarQube.

We usually deploy it in the cloud, but sometimes we also have on-premises solutions.

It has very good scalability and stability.

We also use Fortify, which is another tool to find security errors. Fortify is a better security tool. It is better than SonarQube in finding errors. Sometimes, SonarQube doesn't find some of the errors that Fortify is able to find. Fortify also has a community, which SonarQube doesn't have.

Its installation is a little bit complex. We need to install a database, install the product, and specify the version of the database and the product. They can simplify the installation and make it easier. We use docker for the installation because it is easier to use.

Its dashboard needs to be improved. It is not intuitive. It is hard to understand the interface, and it can be improved to provide a better user experience.

I have been using SonarQube for two years.

Its stability is very good.

It has very good scalability. In my company, we have less than 15 users. They are mostly developers.

I have not used the support.

I have used Codestyle and a few other tools. SonarQube is similar to other tools.

Its installation is a little bit complex. They can simplify the installation and make it easier.

We didn't evaluate other options. 

I would rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

We are using it for scanning our web applications, some internal applications and using it for code reviews.

SonarQube is good in terms of code review and to report on basic vulnerabilities in your applications. The code writing standard of SonarQube is good. It may be better in other editions but as we don't use those we're not able to find out with SonarQube. We are using the community, developer version for 14 days. If this version is successful we will go to the full version. We're using it on-premises.

It does not provide deeper scanning of vulnerabilities in an application, on a live session. This is something we are not happy about. Maybe the reason for that is we are running the community edition currently, but other editions may improve on that aspect.

We have been using SonarQube for one year.

It is stable.

SonarQube is scalable.

SonarQube was easy to setup.

We considered using Fortify.

I would rate SonarQube an eight out of 10.

We use SonarQube for determining code coverage, finding bugs, and searching for security-related issues in our development environment.

The code coverage feature is very good.

When performing the code coverage function, there are a lot of warnings that come up and you may not have time to solve them. You need to have the ability to overrule warnings or issues because it may not be possible to commit the time to resolve them immediately. If the product could assist us with fixing issues by giving us more pointers then it would help to resolve more of the warnings without such a commitment in terms of time.

SonarQube needs some improvement in its ability to find security-related issues.

I have been using SonarQube for the past seven or eight years.

We have not found any bugs or had trouble with stability. We have had some minor hiccups, here and there, but otherwise, we are fine.

We have not found any issues with respect to scalability. 

I have not personally been in contact with technical support. I believe that our team recently had contact with them when we migrated to the newer version, and we received help from their support agent.

I have also used Veracode and when comparing the two, I find that Veracode is better at finding security-related issues during the static code analysis. At the same time, during my PoC with Veracode, they did not claim to be able to provide everything that SonarQube does. 

I was not involved in the initial setup. However, I do know that it can be set up within one or two days.

We have an in-house team for deployment and maintenance.

I am satisfied with the pricing.

In general, I am very satisfied with SonarQube and I highly recommend it. If you are looking for full coverage and quality improvement then it is the best product to use.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I'm a user also, but I'm also responsible for information security.

I am the principal of security in the office. I'm the one that actually advises people about enhancing or incorporating information security aspects. Right now, we are using a community version. We have yet to subscribe for the enterprise license because we need more disciplined developers first.

Within our organization, there are roughly 14 people using this solution.

We use it to find the scoop, or the use, for peer review for the developers. It will require more time, to get used to it and to get trained. My team is very small and I am part of the development team — I'm in the security team but I'm also part of the development team. I am helping to build this along with the team.

The product itself has a friendly UI. It's easy to use and we understand how to manage the admin control panel, it's really quick. It's really easy to perform admin jobs using the control panel. 

The tools are really easy to use. With the coding, we can build a bunch of rules that apply for each programming language, for example, CSS, Java, and more. Even with the community version, we can still set up rules. We accommodate them and they give us the best quality. It's been a great experience so far.

We could use some team support, but since we are using the community version, it's not available.

Also, because we are using the community version, we have some problems from time to time regarding the SSO logins.

Sometimes you need more time to configure things, to edit some profiles.

SonarQube has come to the end of the project phase. The development team doesn't really utilize this because it's in the product development phase. They need more paths and delivery — they don't really care about security. But now, since we are also certified technical security, we can go ahead and provide that for them.

In short, communication needs to be better.

Automation could be better. Sometimes by default, you need to configure some rules regarding detection. You need to have some parameters set regarding false-positive risk. 

We have had SonarQube for over a year, but we have only been using it for the past two months.

With the use of community version, we already have utilized and carried out our needs to fulfil application security at the earlier stage with small medium SDLC Team.

The initial setup was very straightforward. Overall, deployment took roughly one week.

There are so many qualitative tools other than SonarQube, but I think it's the only platform that is open-source; however, it doesn't cover you end-to-end — from the static, dynamic, and interactive source.

Once we're done with SonarQube, we will switch to a proprietary tool, like Qualys — something that provides more end-to-end — but before we can do that, we need more people who know how to properly run the software.

Overall, I would recommend SonarQube for your initial software quality.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

I have used SonarQube for static code analysis. I am using it to assess my internal applications.

I like the by-default policies that are they, as they seem to cover most of what I need. I see that as an essential feature.

The interface could be a little better and should be enhanced.

More support for integration with third-party products would be an improvement.

I have been using SonarQube for more than five years.

I have not faced any bugs or glitches in SonarQube.

I have not been in contact with technical support, although my teams would have definitely reached out.

I would not say that the initial setup was complex, although it was not smooth enough. This was a mixed, hybrid set up because every environment has its own applications to deploy. That said, it was not so critical that we were no able to manage it.

We have an in-house team in charge of maintenance. I have four people who are on payroll and an augmented staff of three more.

SonarQube is an open-source product that can be used free of charge. It is a cost-effective solution.

You cannot really compare this product to commercial solutions. However, the features that it provides out of the box are very good.

When it comes to other technologies, such as the Checkmarx of the world, they are better than SonarQube. This is something that they should look at as this project evolves.

This product is leading its class in the open-source community. It is absolutely a product that I can recommend. I think that digital organizations that have budget constraints should look at this technology, and then they can evolve it as per their needs.

In the future, I may look into deploying SonarQube in a hybrid model.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

When it comes to security, this solution is pretty great.

The static code analysis of the solution is the most important aspect for us. When it comes to security breaches within the code, we can leverage some rules to allow us to identify the repetition in our code and the possible targets that we may have. It makes it very easy to review our code for security purposes.

The solution is quite stable.

You can scale the solution if you need to.

In terms of solving for security breaches in the code, we are looking for different tools to help us catch things much sooner. Right now, we're not doing so well on this front.  Therefore, we are looking for some other options in the market. I'm not the one who is tasked with looking at the moment, however, we are actively seeking out a more effective option for the static code analysis. 

There are sometimes security breaches in our code, which aren't be caught by SonarQube. In the security area, SonarCube has to improve. It needs to better compete with other products.

The solution could offer some sort of alert feature. We've had an incident, where somebody removed the solution from the pipeline and there were a couple of code instances that were pushed and married with the codebase without passing through SonarQube. It would be nice if we were alerted to that. If the solution is off-line or turned off, we'd like to be able to tell so that we can decide if it should be on or if it was a mistake.

It would be great if it could support testing and configurations a bit more. 

We've only been working with the solution for one year. It hasn't been that long.

The solution is very stable. We don't have any issues with its reliability. It's been quite good so far.

The architecture that we have is not that big, however, from the scalability point of view, SonarQube supports scalability quite well.

At the moment, we have a hybrid working model on the vendor side, as well as on the in-house team. The in-house team has 5 members and the vendor has maybe 20 people, more or less. All in all, we can say we have about 25 people using the solution at any given time.

We did not previously use a different solution. It was always manual code reviewing via the most experienced team members who would offer guidance on adjustments.

Right now, we are not using the enterprise features of the solution. I don't know about the licensing as I was not the one who introduced SonarQube into the pipeline. I believe we are using the free community edition and therefore aren't actually paying any money for it.

I did an exercise a couple of months ago with my colleague. After this, I listed other products and their security aspects. I don't know if we found a solution that can offer us better features for security. I don't know if we will keep SonarQube in the pipeline or we will sell the product and get another product. I'm not sure at this point.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I believe we are using the latest version of the solution, however, I don't know the exact number.

I would advise others considering the solution to consider the level of security they need. If they are very concerned about security and the application is very sensitive, then SonarQube may not be the best option and they should seek out other products.

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten.