We performed a comparison between Mend.io and Qualys Web Application Scanning 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."For us, the most valuable tool was open-source licensing analysis."
"There are multiple different integrations there. We use Mend for CI/CD that goes through Azure as well. It works seamlessly. We never have any issues with it."
"We set the solution up and enabled it and we had everything running pretty quickly."
"The solution boasts a broad range of features and covers much of what an ideal SCA tool should."
"WhiteSource helped reduce our mean time to resolution since the adoption of the product."
"The most valuable features are the reporting, customizing libraries "In-house, White list, license selection", comparing the products/projects, and License & Copyright resolution."
"The most valuable feature is the unified JAR to scan for all langs (wss-scanner jar)."
"The most valuable feature is the inventory, where it compiles a list of all of the third-party libraries that we have on our estate."
"It is a good product for website penetration testing to detect vulnerabilities."
"Licensing is the most valuable. Qualys provides the best licensing for companies. It is the best product for the development purposes of web applications. The product has a lot of integrations."
"We have experienced quick customer support. They have a complete list of our previous issues along with our history, which makes it faster for them to solve issues."
"The most valuable feature of Qualys Web Application Scanning is the effective scanning that can be done."
"QualysGuard web-based scanner is very useful for performing external penetration and PCI scans from remote locations."
"It is a cloud-based solution, so it is easy to scale."
"It combines both web application vulnerability management and internal vulnerability management on one platform and dashboard. Usually, you have to purchase separate tools."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is the progressive scan. It is good. It's done in 24 hours."
"It should support multiple SBOM formats to be able to integrate with old industry standards."
"Make the product available in a very stable way for other web browsers."
"Some detected libraries do not specify a location of where in the source they were matched from, which is something that should be enhanced to enable quicker troubleshooting."
"If anything, I would spend more time making this more user-friendly, better documenting the CLI, and adding more examples to help expand the current documentation."
"WhiteSource only produces a report, which is nice to look at. However, you have to check that report every week, to see if something was found that you don't want. It would be great if the build that's generating a report would fail if it finds a very important vulnerability, for instance."
"The UI is not that friendly and you need to learn how to navigate easily."
"I would like to have an additional compliance pack. Currently, it does not have anything for the CIS framework or the NIST framework. If we directly run a scan, and it is under the CIS framework, we can directly tell the auditor that this product is now CIS compliant."
"Needs better ACL and more role definitions. This product could be used by large organisations and it definitely needs a better role/action model."
"The area of false positives could be improved. There are quite a number of false positives as compared to other solutions. They could probably fine tune the algorithm to be able to reduce the number of false positives being detected."
"The support could be faster."
"They should try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing."
"The reporting contains too many false positives."
"Sometimes the response time is low because the handshake fails, and then you have to re-login and start again."
"Deployment can be complicated."
"The virus code updates are not frequent enough."
"It should have better automatic reporting."
More Qualys Web Application Scanning Pricing and Cost Advice →
Mend.io is ranked 13th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews while Qualys Web Application Scanning is ranked 19th in Application Security Tools with 31 reviews. Mend.io is rated 8.4, while Qualys Web Application Scanning is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys Web Application Scanning writes "A stable solution that can be used for infrastructure vulnerability scanning and web application scanning". Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Veracode, Snyk and Checkmarx One, whereas Qualys Web Application Scanning is most compared with OWASP Zap, Veracode, SonarQube, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Fortify WebInspect. See our Mend.io vs. Qualys Web Application Scanning 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.