We performed a comparison between Fortify WebInspect and Rapid7 InsightAppSec based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"The accuracy of its scans is great."
"Technical support has been good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the graphical interface."
"It's very easy to use and user-friendly. It does the job."
"In Rapid7 InsightAppSec, a distinctive feature is the provision of a CDM for integrating web servers and web applications. To establish the connection between these applications, you only need to paste the provided CDN into your metadata. Once connected, every piece of information, including vulnerabilities, can be accessed. It also offers demo sessions."
"The solution is stable."
"It uses a signature-based method to check for problems with your code and will provide an alert if anything is found."
"The initial setup for us was easy enough. We didn't face too many issues. Deployment took maybe 30 minutes. It's quite quick and doesn't cause too much trouble at the outset."
"It is a very robust solution."
"We have seen measurable decrease in the mean time to respond to threats by 20 percent."
"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."
"Fortify WebInspect could improve user-friendliness. Additionally, it is very bulky to use."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"The initial setup was complex."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"The installation could be a bit easier. Usually it's simple to use, but the installation is painful and a bit laborious and complex."
"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange. They need to work a little bit more on their interface to make it more understandable. The interface is the only problem. I'm using Rapid7, which is very intuitive. There are other applications available in the market with a better interface. They can include more techniques or options to test different types of security because the templates are limited. It would be great to see them follow the MITRE ATT&CK framework or what is there in tools like Veracode and Synopsys."
"I would like more details of what the product can do."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
"The product’s pricing could be flexible."
"When you add new projects for the same product, it either duplicates or replaces the scan configuration. If I run a scan for the same product with a different scan configuration, it should keep the previous scan configuration and not replace it with the new scan configuration. It should just add the new scan configuration. That would be helpful. They do keep the results as it is, but the scan configuration keeps changing. For example, I have set a scan configuration to a full scan, and next week, I want to run a new scan for the same product with some changes or new functionalities. I want to run a partial scan. Currently, if I change the scan configuration to partial, it changes the old one also to partial. That should be improved."
"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work. We found that we'd try to use widgets, but often getting them to work for us wasn't very clear. They need to be more user friendly or offer better instructions."
"We get a lot of false positives during the tests."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
Fortify WebInspect is ranked 2nd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 17 reviews while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is ranked 3rd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 12 reviews. Fortify WebInspect is rated 7.0, while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortify WebInspect writes "A powerful tool catering to multiple use cases that provides reasonably good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 InsightAppSec writes "A highly scalable and robust product that enables users to automate scans". Fortify WebInspect is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify on Demand, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and Invicti, whereas Rapid7 InsightAppSec is most compared with Rapid7 AppSpider, OWASP Zap, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Acunetix and Veracode. See our Fortify WebInspect vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec report.
See our list of best Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) vendors.
We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.