Contrast Security Assess vs HCL AppScan comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Contrast Security Assess and HCL AppScan 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. HCL AppScan Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries.""In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs.""It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product.""By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time.""The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes.""The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of.""We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used.""Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

More Contrast Security Assess Pros →

"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base.""IBM AppScan has made our work easy, as we can do four to five scans of websites at a time, which saves time when it comes to vulnerability.""We use it as a security testing application.""The solution offers services in a few specific development languages.""The most valuable feature of the solution is Postman.""The product has valuable features for static and dynamic testing.""The HCL AppScan turnaround time for Burp Suite or any new feature request is pretty good, and that is why we are sticking with the HCL.""For me, as a manager, it was the ease of use. Inserting security into the development process is not normally an easy project to do. The ability for the developer to actually use it and get results and focuses, that's what counted."

More HCL AppScan Pros →

Cons
"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side.""The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust.""Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences.""The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different.""To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use.""The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities.""The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes.""The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

More Contrast Security Assess Cons →

"They should have a better UI for dashboards.""The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved.""I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources.""They have to improve support.""One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration""The penetration testing feature should be included.""The solution needs to improve in some areas. The tool needs to add more languages. It also needs to improve its speed.""IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."

More HCL AppScan Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."
  • "You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."
  • "The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."
  • "For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."
  • "It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."
  • "The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."
  • "The solution is expensive."
  • More Contrast Security Assess Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
  • "With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
  • "Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
  • "HCL AppScan is expensive."
  • "I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."
  • "The price is very expensive."
  • "The solution is moderately priced."
  • "The price of HCL AppScan is okay, in my opinion. You just buy HCL AppScan and don't pay anything anymore, meaning it is just a one-time purchase."
  • More HCL AppScan Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.
    Top Answer:The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten.
    Top Answer:Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to the… more »
    Top Answer:The product has valuable features for static and dynamic testing.
    Top Answer:HCL AppScan generates false results. Sometimes, it incorrectly identifies requests as vulnerable when they are not vulnerable. In the ADSL feature managed, the primary objective is to identify… more »
    Top Answer:HCL AppScan efficiently scans through the website and identifies vulnerabilities for AWS. It is reducing tools day by day, making it more efficient.
    Ranking
    Views
    1,481
    Comparisons
    900
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    511
    Rating
    8.5
    Views
    5,763
    Comparisons
    4,452
    Reviews
    17
    Average Words per Review
    339
    Rating
    7.2
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Contrast Assess
    IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
    Learn More
    Overview

    Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

    IBM Security AppScan enhances web application security and mobile application security, improves application security program management and strengthens regulatory compliance. By scanning your web and mobile applications prior to deployment, AppScan enables you to identify security vulnerabilities and generate reports and fix recommendations.

    Sample Customers
    Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.
    Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company9%
    REVIEWERS
    Government16%
    Transportation Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Government10%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise55%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise75%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    Contrast Security Assess vs. HCL AppScan
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Contrast Security Assess is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while HCL AppScan is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 39 reviews. Contrast Security Assess is rated 8.8, while HCL AppScan is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Contrast Security Assess writes "We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". Contrast Security Assess is most compared with Veracode, Fortify WebInspect, Seeker, Checkmarx and SonarQube, whereas HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional. See our Contrast Security Assess vs. HCL AppScan report.

    See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.