We performed a comparison between Cisco SecureX and Fortify Application Defender 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."SecureX takes all the separate pieces of security within your company, adds in intelligence from different sites and services on the internet, and makes them work together."
"The automation and orchestration tools are the most valuable features."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"One of the most valuable features is the simplicity of deploying SecureX. It's very easy to do that and then you gain very detailed visibility into everything that's going on in your network and, obviously, at the device level. There's just a wealth of information that you can pull from all of these products that are part of SecureX. You know exactly if you have an issue or not."
"The forensics are amazing because when you have enrichment, and the solutions talk with each other, when you need it, you have the ability to know everything in the organization: when, why, whatever."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to manage all the applications and visibility. For example, if there is malware, spam, or another component that wants to attack the company in my servers, network, or applications, then SecureX will react to the problem."
"Integrates well with our existing security infrastructure."
"The most beneficial feature of Cisco SecureX for cybersecurity efforts is its integration with other Cisco solutions and the environment. This sets it apart, as its APIs and overall integration capabilities are very strong. Additionally, its detection capabilities are commendable."
"The product saves us cost and time."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automatically feed it rules what it's coupled with the WebInspect dynamic application scanning technology."
"The documentation can be improved and the on-prem integration. The set of applications that it was integrated with wasn't comprehensive."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"I would like it to integrate with another solution, e.g., DNA. I would like it to connect to that solution, but not the security aspect."
"The automation and orchestration could be simpler. It could be that all the other parts are that easy to use so that these stick out as a negative, but that's the trickiest part for us. The workflows within the orchestration are just a bit more difficult."
"Remediation stuff could be integrated into the product's automation."
"They could expand into more areas. The more third-parties that we have tied into it, the better. The capabilities are there. As they just continue to involve the product, the more things that you can look into, then the more analytics that you can get. Also, the more data that we can get, then the better off we will be."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"The licensing can be a little complex."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
Cisco SecureX is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 13 reviews while Fortify Application Defender is ranked 34th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews. Cisco SecureX is rated 9.0, while Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Cisco SecureX writes "Gives our customers visibility and they don't have to go multiple management consoles anymore". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Reliable solution with excellent machine learning algorithms but expensive and lacking support". Cisco SecureX is most compared with Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Trend Vision One, Splunk SOAR and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Checkmarx One, Coverity, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, SonarQube and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our Cisco SecureX vs. Fortify Application Defender report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
