Veracode
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Veracode's? The following comparison table enables you to discern the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company’s cybersecurity needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the dedicated page.
Organization
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
Focus
|
|||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
Employees
|
641 | ||
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
Maximum of 8.47 based on 746 reviews over 9 years from: G2, Gartner Peer Insights, PeerSpot, Software Advice and TrustRadius.
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
||
|
Research Firms
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
Founded
|
2001 | ||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|||
|
CVE
|
257 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide.
|
Pending
|
|
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
FedRAMP, SOC 2 Type II, SOC 3 and StateRAMP |
|
|
Documentation
|
|||
|
Visits
|
38K per month. Top 3: 48% CO, 16% GB, 11% US and others 25%
|
224K per month. Top 3: 54% US, 32% IN, 2% and others 12%
|
|
|
Authority
|
|||
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
||
| Marketplaces | AWS, Azure and GitHub | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
14-day free trial and PoV
|
||
|
Demo
|
|||
|
Pricing
|
|||
|
Pricing drivers
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
||
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
Yes | Yes |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No information available
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
Chains vulnerabilities to reveal new, higher-impact ones.
|
Chains vulnerabilities to reveal new, higher-impact ones.
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
||
|
Zero-day vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Zero-day vulnerability research continuously
|
Zero-day vulnerability research continuously
|
|
SLA
|
None | ||
|
Accreditations
|
|||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Pending
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 65 standards, 29 in common and 36 additional.
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
32 standards, 29 in common and 3 additional.
|
|
Detection method
|
|||
|
False positives
|
21 times better
|
24 times better
|
3% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
60 times better
|
76 times better
|
1% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
4 remediation options, 3 in common and 1 additional.
|
Same, plus 1 remediation option.
|
3 remediation options, all in common.
|
|
Outputs
|
5 formats, 3 in common and 1 additional.
|
Same, plus 2 formats.
|
4 formats, 3 in common and 1 additional.
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes | ||
|
IDE
|
3 functionalities, 2 in common and 1 additional.
|
2 functionalities, all in common.
|
|
|
CLI
|
|||
|
CI/CD
|
|||
|
SCA
|
|||
|
Reachability
|
No
|
||
|
SBOM
|
|||
|
Containers
|
|||
|
Source SAST (languages)
|
17 languages, 15 in common and 2 additional.
|
||
|
Source SAST (frameworks)
|
20 frameworks, 5 in common and 15 additional.
|
15 frameworks, 5 in common and 10 additional. |
|
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary in common.
|
6 types of binaries, 1 in common and 5 additional.
|
|
|
DAST
|
5 attack surfaces, all in common.
|
8 attack surfaces, 5 in common and 3 additional. |
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
Secrets
|
16 secrets types, 5 in common and 11 additional.
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability.
|
5 secrets types in common
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, 1 in common and 2 additional.
|
1 function in common.
|
|
|
Fast and automatic
|
|||
|
Open source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
|
Deployment
|
|||
| Regions | |||
|
Status
|
|||
|
Incidents
|
Pending
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
SCM integrations
|
4 integrations, all in common.
|
4 integrations, all in common
|
|
|
Binary repositories integrations
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing integrations
|
5 integrations, 2 in common and 3 additional. |
||
|
ChatOps integrations
|
None |
None
|
6 integrations. |
|
IDE integrations
|
6 integrations, 2 in common and 4 additional. |
||
|
CI/CD integrations
|
17 integrations, all in common.
|
11 integrations, all in common.
|
|
|
SCA integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
Container integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner, (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
SAST integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
DAST integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
IAST integrations
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud Integrations
|
|||
|
CSPM integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
None | |
|
Secrets integrations
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed)
|
Native scanner (included, no integration needed) |
|
|
Compliance integrations
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
References were last checked on Nov 25, 2024.
Free trial
Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start your 21-day free trial and discover the benefits of the Continuous Hacking Essential plan. If you prefer the Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' hacking team, fill out this contact form.