We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning 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 UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"It is an extremely robust, scalable, and stable solution."
"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"The user interface is good."
"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"Almost all the features are good. This solution has simplified designing and architecting for our solutions. We were early adopters of microservices. Their documentation is good. You don't need to put in much effort in setting it up and learning stuff from scratch and start using it. The learning curve is not too much."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The solution is stable."
"The most effective feature of the product is the ability to scan the entire environment."
"Our customers adopt this solution because of the replication testing and the vulnerability assessment it can do. It is a multi-faceted product."
"We use the tool for our websites. We have a vulnerable subdomain. The tool helps to scan it for vulnerabilities."
"It collects the vulnerabilities on the hostnames and sends them to the Tenable.io cloud. Tenable has its own cloud where Tenable.io is running, but there are many connectors to other cloud solutions. Tenable can do vulnerability scanning for other cloud managers such as Azure, Amazon, and so on."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which provides a good level of detail with respect to vulnerabilities."
"It is fully automated."
"Reporting could be improved."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"The products must provide better integration with build tools."
"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."
"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning could improve by offering faster fuzzing."
"The dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"The solution's dashboards could be improved and made more user-friendly."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning conducts a general scan, which wastes time. The scan needs to be specific."
"It isn't easy to manage vulnerabilities in Tenable."
"It would be great if there were a dashboard that is more user-friendly."
"The reporting has a very limited customization capability."
"The platform's technical support services could be better."
More Tenable.io Web Application Scanning Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortify on Demand is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 56 reviews while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is ranked 24th in Application Security Tools with 14 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is rated 7.6. 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 Tenable.io Web Application Scanning writes "Highly Recommended Solution with Latest Scanning Methods". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and GitHub Advanced Security, whereas Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is most compared with Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, SonarQube, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Invicti. See our Fortify on Demand vs. Tenable.io Web Application Scanning report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.