We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Fortify on Demand 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 most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"The usability and overall scan results are good."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."
"Its ability to perform different types of scans, keep everything in one place, and track the triage process in Fortify SSC stands out."
"We identified a lot of security vulnerability much earlier in the development and could fix this well before the product was rolled out to a huge number of clients."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"Once we have our project created with our application pipeline connected to the test scanning, it only takes two minutes. The report explaining what needs to be modified related to security and vulnerabilities in our code is very helpful. We are able to do static and dynamic code scanning."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"It's a stable and scalable solution."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"The licensing was good."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version."
"Acunetix needs to include agent analysis."
"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."
"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."
"Integration to CI/CD pipelines could be improved. The reporting format could be more user friendly so that it is easy to read."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the reports. They could benefit from being more user-friendly and intuitive."
"They have a release coming out, which is full of new features. Based on their roadmap, there's nothing that I would suggest for them to put in it that they haven't already suggested. However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved. I am working with them on that, and they're very flexible. They work with their customers and kind of tailor the product to the customer's needs. So far, I am very happy with what they're able to provide. Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but that would be about it."
"We typically do our bulk uploads of our scans with some automation at the end of the development cycle but the scanning can take a lot of time. If you were doing all of it at regular intervals it would still consume a lot of time. This could procedure could improve."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
Acunetix is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Fortify on Demand is ranked 8th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect. See our Acunetix vs. Fortify on Demand 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.
