We performed a comparison between Fortify Static Code Analyzer and ReShaper based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Code Analysis solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like the Fortify taxonomy as it provides us with a list of all of the vulnerabilities found. Fortify release updated rule packs quarterly, with accompanying documentation, that lets us know what new features are being released."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer tells us if there are any security leaks or not. If there are, then it's notifying us and does not allow us to pass the DevOps pipeline. If it is finds everything's perfect, as per our given guidelines, then it is allowing us to go ahead and start it, and we are able to deploy it."
"I like Fortify Software Security Center or Fortify SSC. This tool is installed on each developer's machine, but Fortify Software Security Center combines everything. We can meet there as security professionals and developers. The developers scan their code and publish the results there. We can then look at them from a security perspective and see whether they fixed the issues. We can agree on whether something is a false positive and make decisions."
"The integration Subset core integration, using Jenkins is one of the good features."
"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."
"It's helped us free up staff time."
"Automating the Jenkins plugins and the build title is a big plus."
"We've found the documentation to be very good."
"The most valuable feature of ReShaper is that it provides continuously scanning of the data in real-time. ReShaper has a really good mechanism and process, they have a decent system."
"It comes with many features and supports almost all of the coding languages available."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer has a bit of a learning curve, and I don't find it particularly helpful in narrowing down the vulnerabilities we should prioritize."
"Fortify Static Code Analyzer is a good solution, but sometimes we receive false positives. If they could reduce the number of false positives it would be good."
"It can be tricky if you want to exclude some files from scanning. For instance, if you do not want to scan and push testing files to Fortify Software Security Center, that is tricky with some IDEs, such as IntelliJ. We found that there is an Exclude feature that is not working. We reported that to them for future fixing. It needs some work on the plugins to make them consistent across IDEs and make them easier."
"Not all languages are supported in Fortify."
"I know the areas that they are trying to improve on. They've been getting feedback for several years. There are two main points. The first thing is keeping current with static code languages. I know it is difficult because code languages pop up all the time or there are new variants, but it is something that Fortify needs to put a better focus on. They need to keep current with their language support. The second thing is a philosophical issue, and I don't know if they'll ever change it. They've done a decent job of putting tools in place to mitigate things, but static code analysis is inherently noisy. If you just take a tool out of the box and run a scan, you're going to get a lot of results back, and not all of those results are interesting or important, which is different for every organization. Currently, we get four to five errors on the side of tagging, and it notifies you of every tiny inconsistency. If the tool sees something that it doesn't know, it flags, which becomes work that has to be done afterward. Clients don't typically like it. There has got to be a way of prioritizing. There are a ton of filter options within Fortify, but the problem is that you've got to go through the crazy noisy scan once before you know which filters you need to put in place to get to the interesting stuff. I keep hearing from their product team that they're working on a way to do container or docker scanning. That's a huge market mover. A lot of people are interested in that right now, and it is relevant. That is definitely something that I'd love to see in the next version or two."
"The generation of false positives should be reduced."
"The pricing is a bit high."
"The price can be improved."
"ReShaper could improve by increasing the performance of the scans. Their application is taking too much CPU. The processing is taking too many CPU resources which causes the system to slow down."
"When it's integrated with a weak server machine, the performance isn't that great. It starts up slowly and even crashes at times."
Earn 20 points
Fortify Static Code Analyzer is ranked 3rd in Static Code Analysis with 14 reviews while ReShaper is ranked 7th in Static Code Analysis. Fortify Static Code Analyzer is rated 8.4, while ReShaper is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortify Static Code Analyzer writes "Seamless to integrate and identify vulnerabilities and frees up staff time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReShaper writes "Detects, analyzes, and fixes any coding issues". Fortify Static Code Analyzer is most compared with Black Duck, Snyk, Veracode and Sonatype Lifecycle, whereas ReShaper is most compared with Whole Tomato Visual Assist. See our Fortify Static Code Analyzer vs. ReShaper report.
See our list of best Static Code Analysis vendors.
We monitor all Static Code Analysis 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.
