We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Fortify Software Security Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Testing (AST)."Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."
"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."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"The reporting is very useful because you can always view an entire list of the issues that you have."
"This is a stable solution at the end of the day."
"You can easily download the tool's rule packs and update them."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"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."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"This solution is difficult to implement, and it should be made more comfortable for the end-users."
"We are having issues with false positives that need to be resolved."
"Fortify Software Security Center's setup is really painful."
More Fortify Software Security Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Acunetix is ranked 11th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 26 reviews while Fortify Software Security Center is ranked 27th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 3 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Fortify Software Security Center is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Software Security Center writes "A fair-priced solution that helps with application security testing ". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Fortify Software Security Center is most compared with Fortify on Demand, Tricentis Tosca and Fortify WebInspect.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.