CxSAST, part of Checkmarx's suite of application security testing solutions, was primarily associated with static application security testing (SAST). However, it seems there might be some confusion, as Synopsys offers its own set of application security solutions, including Coverity for SAST. For clarity, this overview will address both Checkmarx's CxSAST and related Synopsys offerings.

Checkmarx CxSAST

a) Primary Functions and Target Markets:

• Primary Functions: CxSAST focuses on static application security testing to identify vulnerabilities in source code early in the software development lifecycle. It scans the codebase to detect security flaws, coding errors, and potential backdoors that could be exploited by malicious entities.
• Target Markets: Its primary audience includes developers, security professionals, and DevOps teams in industries such as financial services, healthcare, automotive, and retail. It is designed for organizations seeking to integrate security deeply into their DevOps processes.

b) Market Share and User Base:

• CxSAST is considered a strong player in the SAST market. Historically, Checkmarx has been recognized as a leader in application security testing, competing with vendors like Synopsys, Veracode, and Fortify. Market share specifics fluctuate, but Checkmarx has maintained a robust presence due to continuous innovation and enterprise-grade solutions.

c) Key Differentiating Factors:

• Seamless Integration: Checkmarx products are known for seamless integration into existing DevOps pipelines and CI/CD tools, which eases adoption for development teams.
• Customization and Flexibility: Offers high levels of customization, allowing organizations to tailor scanning processes to their specific coding practices and compliance requirements.
• User-Friendly Interface: CxSAST is often praised for its intuitive interface, which simplifies navigation and usage for developers and security teams.

Synopsys Security Solutions (e.g., Coverity)

a) Primary Functions and Target Markets:

• Primary Functions: Synopsys provides a comprehensive suite that includes SAST through Coverity. It identifies critical coding defects and potential vulnerabilities in source code, offering insights to enhance code quality and security.
• Target Markets: Synopsys targets a diverse range of sectors, including automotive, electronics, financial, and technology, appealing to large enterprises and organizations with complex software stacks.

b) Market Share and User Base:

• Synopsys is a recognized leader in the application security space, consistently placed in leadership positions in industry analyst reports. It commands a significant portion of the market, alongside Checkmarx, Fortify, and Veracode, serving a broad user base globally.

c) Key Differentiating Factors:

• Depth of Analysis: Coverity is noted for its deep and comprehensive analysis capabilities, offering detailed insights that cater well to large-scale enterprises managing complex codebases.
• Integration across the SDLC: Synopsys products provide integration across various stages of the software development lifecycle, ensuring security measures are considered from design through deployment.
• Broad Suite of Tools: Beyond SAST, Synopsys offers a wide range of tools, including DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing), IAST (Interactive Application Security Testing), and software composition analysis, providing a holistic application security approach.

Conclusion

Both Checkmarx's CxSAST and Synopsys security solutions are well-regarded in the application security market. While Checkmarx often highlights its ease of integration and customizable solutions, Synopsys emphasizes comprehensive analysis and a broad suite of tools addressing multiple facets of application security. Organizations typically choose between these solutions based on specific needs, existing tech stacks, and desired depth of security analysis.

When comparing CxSAST (Checkmarx Static Application Security Testing) and Synopsys Static Analysis solutions (formerly known as Coverity), it's essential to note that both are designed for static application security testing, but they have distinct capabilities and focuses. Let's break down their similarities, interface comparisons, and unique features:

a) Core Features in Common

1. Static Code Analysis: Both tools perform in-depth analysis of source code, enabling the detection of security vulnerabilities, quality issues, and compliance violations without executing the program.

2. Comprehensive Language Support: Both CxSAST and Synopsys Static Analysis support a wide range of programming languages, making them applicable to diverse development environments.

3. Integration with CI/CD: Both solutions offer integration with continuous integration and continuous deployment pipelines, allowing for early detection and remediation of vulnerabilities in the development lifecycle.

4. Reporting and Dashboards: Both tools provide reporting capabilities and dashboards that offer visibility into the security posture of an application over time, facilitating informed decision-making.

5. Compliance and Security Standards: They check code against several security and coding standards, such as OWASP Top Ten, CWE, and others, to ensure compliance.

b) User Interfaces Comparison

• CxSAST (Checkmarx):

  • Dashboard Orientation: Offers a user-friendly, web-based interface with customizable dashboards that provide insights into the security status of applications.
  • Developer-Centric: Provides a detailed breakdown of vulnerabilities, including training and educational components to help developers understand and fix issues directly in the development environment.
  • Code Viewer: Facilitates a code viewer that highlights problematic sections of code with suggested fixes.

• Synopsys Static Analysis (Coverity):

  • Dashboard Flexibility: Utilizes a robust, slightly more technical interface that offers deep-dive analytics suitable for both security experts and developers.
  • Issue Management: Strong focus on issue management and collaboration, offering comprehensive views of defect information and related source code.
  • Simplicity and Navigation: While detailed, the user interface is designed to reduce complexity and support workflow customization, allowing users to tailor the experience to fit their processes.

c) Unique Features

• CxSAST (Checkmarx):

  • Open Source Code Source Analyzer (OSA): Unique capability for analyzing open-source components in addition to proprietary code.
  • Query Language: Offers a powerful query language enabling customizable rules and checks, allowing organizations to tailor the analysis to their specific needs.
  • DevSecOps Integration: Strong emphasis on DevSecOps, offering features and integrations directly aimed at empowering DevOps teams to incorporate security seamlessly into their workflow.

• Synopsys Static Analysis (Coverity):

  • Quality and Defect Prevention: Besides security, it analyzes code for defects that impact quality and reliability, thus covering a broader spectrum of code analysis.
  • Polyscripting Analysis: Offers advanced features for analyzing multiple scripting languages, recognizing the interaction between different languages in the same application.
  • Modular and Extensible: Allows for deep customization and automation, particularly for complex workflows in large environments, supporting broader SDLC requirements.

Both products are strong choices in the static analysis domain, and the ideal solution depends on the specific needs and existing ecosystem of the organization considering them.

CxSAST (Checkmarx Static Application Security Testing) and Synopsys' suite of application security tools, including their static analysis offerings, are both prominent players in the realm of application security. Their best-fit use cases and industry applicability can be broken down as follows:

a) For what types of businesses or projects is CxSAST the best choice?

CxSAST by Checkmarx is an ideal choice for:

1. Enterprises with Complex Codebases: CxSAST is well-suited for large organizations that have complex, multi-layered applications. Its capability to analyze a vast array of programming languages and frameworks makes it a fit for diverse tech stacks.

2. Development Teams Emphasizing CI/CD: Teams that have fully integrated CI/CD processes can benefit from CxSAST's automation capabilities, allowing for seamless integration into DevSecOps pipelines and enabling frequent and automated security checks.

3. Organizations Focused on High Accuracy: CxSAST is known for reducing false positives, making it suitable for environments where high accuracy is crucial and where teams might not have dedicated resources to handle numerous false alarms.

4. Regulated Industries: Businesses in financial services, healthcare, and other regulated sectors often use CxSAST to adhere to compliance requirements by ensuring their code meets industry security standards.

b) In what scenarios would Synopsys be the preferred option?

Synopsys' portfolio is preferred in scenarios such as:

1. Companies Needing Comprehensive Security Solutions: Synopsys offers a broad range of application security tools including static analysis (Coverity), software composition analysis (Black Duck), and dynamic analysis, making it suitable for organizations looking for an all-encompassing security solution.

2. Industries Requiring Extensive Code Quality Analysis: Synopsys tools are often favored for their code quality assurance capabilities, making them a good fit for industries such as aerospace and automotive where both security and code quality are critical.

3. Projects with a Wide Range of Security Needs: Companies that require a combination of open source management, code quality, and security testing might prefer Synopsys for its integrated toolset.

4. Organizations Focused on Early Detection: With tools like Coverity, Synopsys excels at detecting defects early in the development lifecycle, which is crucial for industries where early issue detection can save significant costs and time.

d) How do these products cater to different industry verticals or company sizes?

Industry Verticals:

• Financial Services and Healthcare: Both CxSAST and Synopsys cater to these sectors by providing industry-specific compliance reporting and supporting secure coding practices to protect sensitive data.

• Automotive and Manufacturing: Synopsys tends to be preferred here because of its emphasis on code quality alongside security, which is critical in systems where failure can have serious consequences.

• Technology and Software Vendors: CxSAST is often chosen by tech companies looking for robust static analysis integrated into agile development processes.

Company Sizes:

• Large Enterprises: Both tools are well-suited, but Synopsys might be favored for those needing a wider range of security services bundled together.

• Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs): CxSAST can be more accessible for SMEs with its focused SAST capabilities and relatively easier integration into existing development pipelines.

In conclusion, the choice between CxSAST and Synopsys will largely depend on the specific needs and structure of the organization, the complexity and criticality of their projects, and the degree to which they need to integrate security into their software development lifecycle.

Conclusion and Final Verdict for CxSAST vs Synopsys

When evaluating CxSAST and Synopsys, it is crucial to consider a variety of factors, including ease of integration, accuracy, scalability, support, pricing, and overall performance. Both products are prominent in the field of application security and offer robust solutions for static application security testing (SAST). However, they have distinct features that may cater to different organizational needs.

a) Considering all factors, which product offers the best overall value?

The determination of which product offers the best overall value largely depends on specific organizational needs and priorities. If integration with a wide range of CI/CD tools and a focus on providing detailed insights is crucial, Synopsys might be favored due to its comprehensive suite of tools and strong support for DevSecOps processes. On the other hand, CxSAST from Checkmarx offers strong customization options, excellent language support, and integration capabilities, which could be more appealing to organizations looking for flexibility and robust language support.

b) Pros and Cons of Choosing CxSAST and Synopsys

Pros of CxSAST:

• Extensive Language Support: Known for supporting a wide range of programming languages, making it ideal for diverse tech stacks.
• Customization and Flexibility: Offers high customization options for adapting to specific organizational security policies.
• Integration Capabilities: Strong integration with numerous CI/CD tools, aiding seamless implementation in existing workflows.
• User-Friendly Interface: Provides an intuitive interface that is relatively easy to use for both developers and security teams.

Cons of CxSAST:

• Initial Setup Complexity: May require more effort and time to set up initially compared to some competitors.
• Cost Considerations: Pricing might be higher for certain features or scalability, which could be a limiting factor for smaller enterprises.

Pros of Synopsys:

• Comprehensive Suite of Tools: Provides a broad array of security tools beyond SAST, including software composition analysis (SCA) and dynamic analysis (DAST), offering a more holistic security solution.
• Strong DevSecOps Integration: Excellent integration in automated DevSecOps environments, enhancing security testing in agile workflows.
• High Accuracy: Known for reducing false positives, which can save time and improve development efficiency.

Cons of Synopsys:

• Complex Pricing Structure: May have a more complex pricing model due to the breadth of tools and features offered.
• Learning Curve: Due to the comprehensive nature of its offerings, users might face a steeper learning curve initially.

c) Recommendations for Users Deciding Between CxSAST vs Synopsys

1. Determine Specific Needs: Organizations should assess their specific needs, such as the importance of language support, integration capabilities, budget constraints, and existing DevSecOps practices. This will guide the choice toward the solution that best matches their requirements.

2. Consider Integration Needs: For companies with extensive CI/CD pipelines and a focus on comprehensive security analysis, Synopsys could be preferred. Companies already using Checkmarx solutions or requiring high language versatility might lean towards CxSAST.

3. Evaluate Total Cost of Ownership: Consider the total cost of ownership, including initial setup, ongoing maintenance, and potential additional costs for scaling or adding features. Conduct a cost-benefit analysis aligned with budget limitations.

4. Trial and Feedback: It might be beneficial to leverage trial versions or demos of both products to gather user feedback from development and security teams. This real-world testing can provide valuable insights into usability and effectiveness in your specific environment.

5. Vendor Support and Community: Evaluate the level of vendor support and community engagement available for each product. Good support can significantly ease transitions and troubleshooting processes.

Ultimately, the choice between CxSAST and Synopsys should be guided by how well each solution aligns with the organization's application security strategy and workflow integration requirements. Both tools offer strong capabilities and have the potential to significantly enhance an organization's security posture.