We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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."The solution is easy to use."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"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."
"We are now deploying less defects to production."
"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the advanced features, user-friendly interface, and integration with other tools."
"The solution is quite helpful for session management and configuration."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has an intercept tab that helps us to scan our APIs, set the response, and request errors."
"The solution has a great user interface."
"The feature that we have found most valuable is that it comes with pre-set configurations. They have a set of predefined options where you can pick one and start scanning. We also have the option of creating our own configurations, like how often do the applications need to be scanned."
"The automated scan is what I find most useful because a lot of customers will need it. Not every domain will be looking for complete security, they just need a stamp on the security key. For these kinds of customers, the scan works really well."
"It helps in API testing, where manual intervention was previously necessary for each payload."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the Burp Intruder tool."
"Improvement can be done as per customer requirements."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products."
"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."
"HCL AppScan needs to improve security."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"One area that can be improved, when compared to alternative tools, is that they could provide different reporting options and in different formats like PDF or something like that."
"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
"The Burp Collaborator needs improvement. There also needs to be improved integration."
"You can have many false positives in Burp Suite. It depends on the scale of the penetration testing."
"There could be an improvement in the API security testing. There is another tool called Postman and if we had a built-in portal similar to Postman which captures the API, we would be able to generate the API traffic. Right now we need a Postman tool and the Burp Suite for performing API tests. It would be a huge benefit to be able to do it in a single UI."
"Currently, the scanning is only available in the full version of Burp, and not in the Community version."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
HCL AppScan is ranked 15th in Application Security Tools with 41 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.8, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. 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 PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and Fortify on Demand, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning and SonarQube. See our HCL AppScan vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
