We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender and Klocwork based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The most valuable feature is the Incremental analysis."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"Technical support is quite good."
"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."
"Now the only issue we have is that whenever we need to get the code we have to build it first. Then we can get the report."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
"Under NIST cybersecurity standards, we must address vulnerabilities within a specified time after discovering them. When we try to propagate those updates and fixes through the system, it would be nice if the clients could reconnect to the existing server or have the server dynamically updated in some way. I know that isn't easy, but maybe processes could be enhanced to make that more streamlined from a DevOps perspective."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
Fortify Application Defender is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 15th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Checkmarx One, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, Coverity, SonarQube and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, Checkmarx One and CodeSonar. See our Fortify Application Defender vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.