SonarQube Reviews

We use SonarQube mostly for code quality testing.

The integrations SonarQube provides with our software delivery pipeline are very seamless. The main benefit of using SonarQube in our organization was having a clean code with fewer static vulnerabilities within the application.

SonarQube could improve its static application security testing as per the industry standard. It would be really great if I could extract the overall report that I see in the dashboard.

I have been using SonarQube for a few years.

SonarQube is a stable solution.

Around 20 to 25 people use the solution in my team.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution can be deployed within a couple of days. We don’t need many people to deploy SonarQube. It is not difficult to maintain the solution.

We use the API call for SonarQube to integrate it into our development workflow. It's a continuous process for us to review the reports and remediate any findings we get from SonarQube. The quality gates and quality profiles are helpful in establishing the required gates and governance that we may need. SonarQube has impacted our team's productivity and code quality over time.

I would recommend SonarQube to other users evaluating it because it helps streamline some of the coding practices. The solution helps teams within the organization get into a good habit of writing clean code. The solution is helpful from a long-term sustainability standpoint.

I would recommend users to try out the open source version of SonarQube. If that doesn't suffice their needs, then they can go for an enterprise version.

Overall, I rate SonarQube an eight out of ten.

SonarCloud's user interface integrates with version control tools like GitLab, showing code smells and commits for code reviews. Within these code reviews, we gain a complete analysis of things like code flow, which was a particularly helpful feature.

SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs.

The main advantage of using Android Lint over SonarCloud is its ease of integration. It was a bit tricky to integrate SonarCloud, inside the CI/CD pipeline, which had some integration challenges. No proper documentation existed, making it tough. 

Specifically, when pushing code and creating merge requests, SonarCloud wouldn't generate the merge request or run itself. This felt clunky and required extra configuration. The documentation just wasn't sufficient for integrating with our cloud and Android Lint. Ultimately, it took too long to integrate SonarCloud, leading us to explore other options like Android lint for improving code quality.

So, adding better documentation on integrating SonarCloud's pipeline within GitLab CI/CD would definitely be a valuable addition from my perspective. That's the key takeaway they should work on.

We've been using SonarCloud for a while, inside TruckITAM, stopping about four months ago. We established our pipeline for seamless build sharing with stakeholders, using Android Lint to optimize the pipeline process and costs.

SonarCloud is well-stable. It's a good system. Whenever I used to commit, it gave proper feedback about our code, like duplication or optimization suggestions. 

Overall, the product is stable, but a few features need addressing to improve the user experience. The integration process and overall flow feel a bit clunky. They need to optimize the user experience. 

It requires a bit of work on the user side. It is difficult for non-trained users. If someone untrained reads their documentation, integrating with SonarCoud should be easy. That's the tricky part. They need a good onboarding process and a support team for communication. We're the clients, so they should provide daily updates on new features and address any integration issues on our cloud.

There should be an open-source community available so that they can target small queries. Our cloud community feels a bit small and not very active. I searched for workarounds and how to cancel merge requests, which took forever.

Also, on the GitLab side, working on CI/CD pipeline automation was challenging. Improving the build time of the application was a pain. We had to write XML files and run scripts.

The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps. That's something I noticed for GitLab and researched for a while. We integrated it successfully for the driver side, but the other application timed out. We used BigRise as an alternative, and it optimized the build time to 10 minutes. That's how we successfully integrated our CI/CD pipeline at TaxRise.

Technical support as a whole, it was a while ago, like three months after we stopped using their services, that they emailed us. They should approach users proactively and try to ensure a smooth integration process. 

We already have a lot on our plates, so we don't have time to chase them. Even if we email them and they respond, we have other tasks in the pipeline. They should take ownership and manage the integration. Our SonarCloud integration ended up getting put on the back burner.

So, in terms of technical support, if you're providing a service, you need to be quick to respond to users and grab their attention. These are a few things SonarCloud could improve.

I wouldn't want to discourage their efforts, so I won't rate them a very bad rating. The product itself is still good, so I'd rate their technical support around six and a half out of ten.

And one other thing you can tell the SonarCloud team: they can improve their open-source community. A strong open-source community can significantly reduce the need for technical support. 

If they have good documentation for integrating with various platforms like web applications, back-end applications, server-side applications, Android, iOS, etc., and also GitLab pipelines, their rating could easily go up to eight and a half, maybe even nine.

Neutral

I currently work with the Android Lint. It's a built-in tool in Android Studio, used for checking errors in the code, code duplication, code smells, and improving code reusability. 

It helps in identifying spelling mistakes, unused variables, and imports, optimizing the code. We chose Android Lint over SonarCloud for similar functionalities, allowing us to improve code quality without relying on a third-party app. 

As an alternative to improve our code quality, we migrated the same functionality to our own cloud environment. This allows us to utilize Android lint for code improvements internally, eliminating reliance on any third-party app.

Some of the good features we found in SonarCloud that were valuable include the user interface integration with version control tools like GitLab. This lets us see code smells and track commits associated with specific code portions for code reviews.

Within these code reviews, we gain a complete analysis of things like code flow, which was a particularly helpful feature. Additionally, we can integrate Android lint directly into our CI/CD pipeline, allowing us to run critical lint checks automatically within the pipeline. This further automates our system and streamlines the development process.

The current pricing is quite cheap. The thousand-line package costs only ten euros per month, which is much cheaper compared to competitors like Veracode, which charge around a hundred or even ninety-nine dollars per month. So, the pricing is good as it is, but if they add features like AI-powered algorithms and core data optimization, they could easily see significant growth.

Overall, I would rate this product around nine out of ten. They're putting a lot of effort into developing the product, and it compares favorably to other options available. Plus, it's free initially with a set limit, making it quite accessible.

One thing SonarCloud could add is a separate AI for comprehensive code analysis. They already suggest improvements and urge users to adopt specific practices, but it could go further. 

For example, imagine using Android Studio and writing some code. SonarCloud's AI could analyze it and suggest algorithm or coding structure improvements.

There are also some application crashes and concurrency issues we encounter due to shared multi-threaded environments. So, another AI check they could offer would be analyzing how to optimize the application's algorithms for better performance. That would be another great improvement for SonarCloud.

We use the product for code-based security scanning.

The platform has fewer false positives. It helps efficient code duplication concentration and integrates well with coverage tooling for generating reports. Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots.

SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement.

We have been using SonarCloud for five years.

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten.

We have more than 1000 SonarCloud users in our organization. It scales as per our project requirements. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

We have ten dedicated engineers working on the product's deployment and maintenance.

I rate the pricing a five out of ten. It has an expensive on-premise version and a community version as well.

I recommend SonarCloud and rate it an eight out of ten. Sometimes, the updates for the product's beta version are simple.

We wanted a coding standard. We used to get coverage using SonarQube, so once the coding coverage was more than 80%, it was only then we could get Jenkins to start the build. Otherwise, Jenkins would fail from the build process. SonarQube is the point at which we confirm the DI. It is in the JUnit test cases where the coverage of the source code was more than 80%.

The SonarQube dashboard looks great.

Currently, we are doing SonarQube's validations for external configuration via XML. It would be better if SonarQube provided a good UI for external configuration.

I've used SonarQube for three and a half years since I started using the product in 2020.

I have not faced any issues with stability so far.

If you know how to work with the solution, it is scalable. There should be some methodologies other than JUnit test cases. There should be some other area involving the code. Four or five developers are using SonarQube with JUnit test cases. They used to build in Jenkins because once Jenkins is built and SonarQube's code coverage is more than 80%, the build happens successfully. Otherwise, the build fails.

SonarQube's technical support is good.

Positive

Since I know how to install SonarQube, I had no issues. I don't think the installation is a big challenge because it's a one-time installation process. You wouldn't have to repeatedly install the solution.

The time taken to deploy the solution comes down to microservices.

In the configuration you maintain for the external file used to evaluate the point, the lines should be less than 80 characters long, and the page should have less than 900 lines. The function size should also be split such that the maximum length of one should be less than 30. That's the configuration we are doing with SonarQube. Also, the number of clients we wrote should be covered within the JUnit test cases. When using Mockito for some of the database functionalities like login and authentication, SonarQube will evaluate the test cases passing through it, even when considering Mockito as the data provider for those test cases. And SonarQube covers those test cases.

When it comes to external configuration, even if we're changing the format of one field, that should be accommodated everywhere in the file. Discrepancies there could make it take some time to install the solution. If they had a UI for the setup, that would be good. Though the XML configuration can be tough, it could be automated.

In the Trivandrum team, we do around one to three microservices, like authentication and inventory. Those are two of the main microservices that I handle. The remaining are handled by some other team from Chennai or somewhere. For us, the coverage with microservices is more than 80%. The authentication service and the inventory services have good coverage.

If somebody is looking for good coverage and a good standard code, they should start using SonarQube. When writing the code, they can ensure it is written properly and not missing any code. If there are many lines we are missing or ignoring from the code, there could be cases where vulnerability can happen from those lines. Before you submit any code to any client, you should ensure the code coverage is more than 80% of the application. I rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

We use it to check the code quality of our software.

We've configured it to run on each commit, providing feedback on our software quality. The solution works quite well remotely.

We would appreciate having PNC checking, though that's only available in a more expensive license type.

There is also room for improvement in the installation process.

I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

It is a stable solution. So, no issues with stability.

We haven't had much requirement for scalability. We had a single-node instance, and that is sufficient for our needs.

We have around 13 developers using this solution. 

Another department handled the installation. We only had one issue related to the number of available files. To perform the analysis, you have quite a lot of available file handles, so we had to increase that limit.

However, maintenance is actually quite easy. It requires a couple of people.

We used some main code quality tools before, along with certain plugins. SonarQube is better due to its integrated nature and easier management. There is no hassle to keep everything up to date.

I would definitely recommend using the solution.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. While I'm satisfied with the product, there's always room for improvement.

I use the solution for static code analysis and to identify vulnerabilities and code smells.

All the features of the solution are quite good.

New plug-ins should be integrated into SonarCloud to give more flexibility to the product.

I have been using the solution for the last couple of years.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability as an eight out of ten. Currently, not many teams are using the product. We are trying to increase the number of users.

The first time, the initial setup was complicated. It got easier once we got used to it.

The deployment took around one to two hours.

The solution is cheaper than other products.

We have not been able to use the product extensively. I would recommend the solution to others. It'll really help the developers to increase their development speed. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Our use case of SonarQube is to analyze code quality and to implement quality dates in our build pipelines.

The ability to tweak the rules and feed them into our build pipelines so that they can become an integral part of those pipelines is a valuable feature. This product works really well, the integrations and pipelines are good.

SonarQube currently requires multiple tools. I'd like to have the ability to use one tool overall. 

We've been using this solution for a few years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We pay a very reasonable, annual licensing fee. 

My recommendation is to just go with this out-of-the-box rule set first. Don't try to tweak them and learn what they mean. First learn what the alerts mean and then slowly tweak it to your specific use cases.

We are using SonarCloud for static analysis. We must utilize this tool for code analysis prior to deployment. For instance, it is necessary to check for bugs or inconsistencies in the code and rectify them. SonarCloud can assist in this regard by providing high-quality content.

The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance.

The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit.

I have been using SonarCloud for approximately one month.

I rate the stability SonarCloud a nine out of ten.

We have approximately 50 it specialists using this solution across a number of projects.

I rate the scalability of SonarCloud a seven out of ten.

I have not used the support often.

I rate SonarCloud an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have used other solutions prior to SonarCloud.

The initial setup of SonarCloud was done without too many issues. It was able to be done in approximately 10 minutes.

I did the implementation of the solution myself.

I am using the free version of the solution.

One person is enough for the maintenance of the solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate SonarCloud a nine out of ten.

We use this solution to configure our pipeline using Jenkins. From an integration perspective, it encompasses many languages and this is very useful.

This solution has helped with the integration and building of our CICD pipeline. Without any scans or assessments, the pipeline and build are not complete. One of the good features of SonarQube is the many languages it supports including Java, dotNET, Typescript and HTML CSS. It also allows us to set custom quality gates and rules.

This solution could be offered on Docker and the cloud. The support for this solution could be improved and the customization rules could also be made simpler. 

I have used this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This solution could be scalable, specifically from a reporting perspective. 

I would rate the customer support for this solution a seven out of ten. 

Neutral

I have previously used Checkmarx, Blackbelt and WhiteSource.

We have experienced a good return on investment using this solution. 

This is a good solution if you are looking for good coverage, quality, and vulnerabilities to be highlighted. That being said, there are better solutions in the market when it comes to SAST scanning.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We use SonarQube to find vulnerabilities in the source code, for better code quality, and code security.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is free.

There could be better integration with other products.

It could have more functionality, and the updates could be faster.

People must be trained extensively before they can use it.

I have been using SonarQube for three years.

It's a software as a service that you can access from on-premise.

The stability is fine. With any software, you must ensure that you keep up to date with the software. As a result, when there are new ways to attack you, the software detects it. You must be prepared. You can't just put it in and forget about it, you have to stay current.

More than just an environment, it was a project. There were about a dozen developers and five testers to ensure that the developers used the tool before handing it over to the testers. To ensure that everything was in order.

I have not contacted technical support.

Previously, we used Fortify. The company that I worked for owned Fortify. We then sold Fortify to another company. We could look at other products to do the job.

The initial setup was straightforward. It only took about two weeks to deploy.

Like in anything, if you're too restricted, it can result in being problematic, the same if you are too loose. In terms of the length of time it takes to deploy, we try to find a happy medium. Two weeks is reasonable.

I am the team leader, and I was assisted with the deployment by another very knowledgeable individual. We are a team of two.

We have seen a return on investment. It finds potential vulnerabilities inside a program's code. If you catch it and you fix it, it's good.

It's an open-source solution, with no additional costs.

We evaluated other products such as Veracode, Checkmarx as well as SonarQube.

The main difference is that SonarQube is free.

I am an expert in so many things, including security experts. We looked at the various products and chose one. And the reason was that any tool, any automated tool that can detect errors, is preferable to none at all.

Most systems are vulnerable at the application level, which means that people who program in Java or.NET may be brilliant, but they don't know about the security. The advice is that those who work in development must also understand security. They must test for security in the same way they test for whether something is red or blue. My recommendation is to have some type of training and to be aware that the application level is the place where most people attack.

I would rate SonarQube a six out of ten.