We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan 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 most valuable feature of the solution is the scanning or security part."
"It comes with all of the templates that we need. For example, we are a company that is regulated by PCI. In order to be PCI compliant, we have a lot of checks and procedures to which we have to comply."
"It provides a better integration for our ecosystem."
"It highlights, with several grades of severity, the types of vulnerabilities, so we can focus on the most severe security vulnerabilities in the code."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."
"The security and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"The solution is cheap."
"It is very convenient to get reports from the tool, which offers high-level environmental statistics."
"We have seen measurable decrease in the mean time to respond to threats by 20 percent."
"The product’s most valuable feature is UI. It is easy to manage and find vulnerabilities in the application."
"It's very easy to use and user-friendly. It does the job."
"You have various attack modules, and you also have the Attack Replay feature for the attack sequence. You can reproduce an attack and see it. That is a very good feature I noticed in this solution. It helps developers as well."
"It is a very robust solution."
"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 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."
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products."
"The pricing has room for improvement."
"I think being able to search across more containers, especially some of the docker elements. We need a little tighter integration there. That's the only thing I can see at this point."
"Sometimes it doesn't work so well."
"They should have a better UI for dashboards."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"It has crashed at times."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"In the future, if they can have integration with a lot of ticketing systems then it would be amazing."
"I would like more details of what the product can do."
"The product’s pricing could be flexible."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
"We get a lot of false positives during the tests."
"They should add more features. I would like to see them do a little more on static analysis and also interactivity analysis. Currently, it does very basic static analysis. It could do a little more static analysis, which is something that would help. A lot more interactivity analysis should also be there. It should basically look at security during interactivity."
"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."
"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."
HCL AppScan is ranked 1st in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 41 reviews while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is ranked 3rd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 12 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.8, while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 InsightAppSec writes "A highly scalable and robust product that enables users to automate scans". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, whereas Rapid7 InsightAppSec is most compared with Rapid7 AppSpider, OWASP Zap, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify WebInspect and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our HCL AppScan 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.
