We performed a comparison between Fortify WebInspect and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Technical support has been good."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous."
"The automation of Veracode is great because we no longer have to run manual testing."
"It is easy to use for us developers. It supports so many languages: C#, .NET Core, .NET Framework, and it even scans some of our JavaScript. You just need the extension to upload the files and the reports are generated with so much detail."
"That it is a cloud-based solution is very valuable to us. We don't need that hardware running our scans and hosting the environment to be scanned. Also, the technology, the static scanning versus dynamic scanning produces a much better result, a more accurate result."
"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"The article scanning is excellent."
"The most valuable features of Veracode Static Analysis are its ability to work with GitLab and GitHub so that you can do the reviews and force the code."
"The innovative features offered by Veracode are excellent."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"Veracode would benefit greatly from more training resources. The videos are great, but I would like more hands-on training writing a script, validating a script with a unit test in a different language, etc. That's something that would be very valuable."
"Veracode's ability to fix flaws is less sophisticated than that of its competitors."
"It will be beneficial for developers if Veracode Greenlight includes Python."
"Veracode has a few shortcomings in terms of how they handle certain components of the UI. For example, in the case of the false positive, it would be highly desirable if the false positive don't show up again on the UI, instead still showing up for any subsequent scan as a false positive. There is a little bit of cluttering that could be avoided."
"It can have more APIs and capabilities to handle other things well. We were doing a trial for it. There were two things that I looked at: one was uploading some Java-related content and the other was uploading database SQL files and having the review done on the quarterback. The Java portion of it worked fine, and it was pretty seamless, but the database portion was not. We uploaded some files to use for vulnerabilities, and the tell-all portion of it was pretty easy. We uploaded a war file and Java files, and we got the reports back on these. They were pretty clear to understand. We did the same thing for the database portion for the most part. However, the content wasn't getting uploaded in a predictable fashion, and it was slow and hard to get done. We had to do it over and over. After it indicated that the content was uploaded, there were no results. There were zero search findings. It was possibly a user error, something that we didn't do correctly, but they had acknowledged that it was something they were currently enhancing. This is something that could be made easier if they haven't already done that. I don't know how many releases they've had in that timeframe. I haven't looked at it since then. It was a trial period."
"They could improve how they fix vulnerabilities. They could have more support in place to help the developers."
"Veracode's container scanning could be improved. We containerize all the platforms we use inside a Docker image. For example, we create a Microsoft Docker image that we build our application on top of. I would like Veracode to implement IT scans before we commit the code."
"One of the most important areas that need improvement for Veracode is its DaaS. Veracode's DAST engines are primitive."
Fortify WebInspect is ranked 2nd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 17 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Fortify WebInspect is rated 7.0, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify WebInspect writes "A powerful tool catering to multiple use cases that provides reasonably good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". Fortify WebInspect is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify on Demand, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and Checkmarx One, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our Fortify WebInspect vs. Veracode report.
We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.
