We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."The solution is cheap."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."
"For me, as a manager, it was the ease of use. Inserting security into the development process is not normally an easy project to do. The ability for the developer to actually use it and get results and focuses, that's what counted."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the scanning or security part."
"The reporting part is the most valuable feature."
"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman."
"The solution is easy to use."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community."
"For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"The databases for HCL are small and have room for improvement."
"The product has some technical limitations."
"If HCL AppScan is able to alert the clients over email once the scan is complete, it would be great. Right now, HCL AppScan doesn't let me know if the scanning part is finished or not, because of which I have to come back and check mostly."
"Many silly false positives are produced."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"Scans become slow on large websites."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
HCL AppScan is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 41 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. 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 Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and OWASP Zap, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA).
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.