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)."The product is useful, particularly in its sensitivity and scanning capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."
"The solution is easy to install. I would rate the product's setup between six to seven out of ten. The deployment time depends on the applications that need to be scanned. We have a development and operations team to take care of the product's maintenance."
"This solution saves us time due to the low number of false positives detected."
"AppScan is stable."
"It was easy to set up."
"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"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."
"They could add a software component analysis tool."
"Improvement can be done as per customer requirements."
"Sometimes it doesn't work so well."
"They should have a better UI for dashboards."
"We would like to integrate with some of the other reporting tools that we're planning to use in the future."
"I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers."
"It has crashed at times."
"In future releases, I would like to see more aggressive reports. I would also like to see less false positives."
"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.
