We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Fortify WebInspect 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."I do not remember any issues with stability."
"Micro Focus WebInspect and Fortify code analysis tools are fully integrated with SSC portals and can instantly register to error tracking systems, like TFS and JIRA."
"It is an extremely robust, scalable, and stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is that it connects with your development platforms, such as Microsoft Information Server and Jira."
"One of the top features is the source code review for vulnerabilities. When we look at source code, it's hard to see where areas may be weak in terms of security, and Fortify on Demand's source code review helps with that."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to submit your code and have it run in the background. Then, if something comes up that is more specific, you have the security analyst who can jump in and help, if needed."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"It is scalable and very easy to use."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"Technical support has been good."
"If you have a continuous integration in place, for example, and you want it to run along with your build and you want it to be fast, you're not going to get it. It adds to your development time."
"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."
"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."
"We want a user-based control and role-based access for developers. We want to give limited access to developers so that it only pertains to the code that they write and scanning of the codes for any vulnerabilities as they're progressing with writing the code. As of now, the interface to give restricted access to the developers is not the best. It gives them more access than what is basically required, but we don't want over-provisioning and over-access."
"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."
"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"Integration to CI/CD pipelines could be improved. The reporting format could be more user friendly so that it is easy to read."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"The scanner could be better."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews while Fortify WebInspect is ranked 2nd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 17 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Fortify WebInspect is rated 7.0. 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 WebInspect writes "A powerful tool catering to multiple use cases that provides reasonably good technical support". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Snyk, whereas Fortify WebInspect is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Acunetix, OWASP Zap, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our Fortify WebInspect vs. Fortify on Demand report.
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.