We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Fortify Software Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The licensing was good."
"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"The solution scans our code and provides us with a dashboard of all the vulnerabilities and the criticality of the vulnerabilities. It is very useful that they provide right then and there all the information about the vulnerability, including possible fixes, as well as some additional documentation and links to the authoritative sources of why this is an issue and what's the correct way to deal with it."
"Fortify on Demand's best feature is that there's no need to install and configure it locally since it's on the cloud."
"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."
"I do not remember any issues with stability."
"The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."
"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand can improve by having more graphs. For example, to show the improvement of the level of security."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"The thing that could be improved is reducing the cost of usage and including some of the most pricey features, such as dynamic analysis and that sort of functionality, which makes the difference between different types of tools."
"We would like a reduction in the time frame of scans. It takes us three to five days to run a scan now. We would like that reduced to under three days."
"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."
"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent. When we are coding the endpoint it will not work, we have to use Windows Agent. This is something they could improve."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."
"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."
More Fortify Software Security Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortify on Demand is ranked 9th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 56 reviews while Fortify Software Security Center is ranked 27th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 3 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Fortify Software Security Center is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Software Security Center writes "A fair-priced solution that helps with application security testing ". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Sonatype Lifecycle, whereas Fortify Software Security Center is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Checkmarx One and Fortify WebInspect. See our Fortify Software Security Center vs. Fortify on Demand report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.