We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and Seeker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."
"This solution saves us time due to the low number of false positives detected."
"The security and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."
"This is a stable solution."
"We are now deploying less defects to production."
"Usually when we deploy the application, there is a process for ethical hacking. The main benefit is that, the ethical hacking is almost clean, every time. So it's less cost, less effort, less time to production."
"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
"IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"They have to improve support."
"A desktop version should be added."
"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."
"IBM Security AppScan Source is rather hard to use."
"I think being able to search across more containers, especially some of the docker elements. We need a little tighter integration there. That's the only thing I can see at this point."
"It has crashed at times."
"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
HCL AppScan is ranked 11th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 41 reviews while Seeker is ranked 25th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 1 review. HCL AppScan is rated 7.8, while Seeker is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Seeker writes "More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and OWASP Zap, whereas Seeker is most compared with Synopsys API Security Testing, Coverity, Contrast Security Assess, SonarQube and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.