We performed a comparison between Fortify Static Code Analyzer and JFrog Xray based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Static Code Analysis."Automating the Jenkins plugins and the build title is a big plus."
"The reference provided for each issue is extremely helpful."
"You can really see what's happening after you've developed something."
"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."
"We've found the documentation to be very good."
"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 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."
"We write software, and therefore, the most valuable aspect for us is basically the code analysis part."
"JFrog Xray's reporting feature has a lot of options in it, including scanning."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The most valuable feature of JFrog Xray is the display of the entire internal dependencies hierarchy."
"I would say that this solution has helped our organization by allowing us to automate a lot of the processes."
"If multiple dependencies and vulnerabilities are found in a project, JFrog Xray is intelligent enough to tell you which vulnerability to target first."
"JFrog Xray shows us a list of vulnerabilities that can impact our code."
"Good reporting functionalities."
"The product shows false positives for Python applications."
"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."
"It comes with a hefty licensing fee."
"The troubleshooting capabilities of this solution could be improved. This would reduce the number of cases that users have to submit."
"Fortify's software security center needs a design refresh."
"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."
"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."
"JFrog Xray does not have a dashboard."
"Since we have been using the solution via APIs, there are some limitations in the APIs."
"I think that the user interface should be expanded to provide customers with a better dashboard for reviewing their feedback regarding their images and the vulnerabilities that are associated with the images."
"The speed of JFrog Xray should improve. Other solutions have better performance."
"Lacks deeper reporting, the ability to compare things."
"Reporting is crucial, but it is lacking in the current tool. Every organization seeks specific data points rather than general information. Therefore, we require customized reports from the Xray tool."
"JFrog Xray's documentation and error logging could be improved."
Fortify Static Code Analyzer is ranked 3rd in Static Code Analysis with 14 reviews while JFrog Xray is ranked 17th in Vulnerability Management with 7 reviews. Fortify Static Code Analyzer is rated 8.4, while JFrog Xray is rated 8.2. 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 JFrog Xray writes "An intelligent solution that prioritizes which vulnerability to target first in your project". Fortify Static Code Analyzer is most compared with Black Duck, Snyk, Veracode, Sonatype Lifecycle and Semgrep Code, whereas JFrog Xray is most compared with Black Duck, Snyk, Mend.io, Veracode and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks.
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.