I recommend the solution to its potential users for trial. Fortify WebInspect is a very old product and helps with many use cases owing to its powerful functionalities.

I take care of the maintenance part of the product. Three of my colleagues who are engineers also help me with the maintenance phase.

Considering the licensing cost of the product, bug-related issues, and difficulty in installation compared to other products, I rate the overall product a seven to eight out of ten.

This is a good scanning tool. I recommend having your application scanned in the early stages of your development so that you don't get into back and forth development cycles and deployment in production can be done more efficiently. 

 I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

Fortify WebInspect is always the first tool I recommend for users.

We are integrators. 

We're always dealing with the latest version of the solution. The latest would be 22.1. I started with using 20.1.

I'd recommend the solution. It's a helpful tool. 

I would rate the solution overall at an eight out of ten. It will continue to evolve, I'm sure. 

While implementing WebInspect, it is always better to keep all the required software installed and ready. The installation of WebInspect has a lot of dependencies, such as .NET, Java, SQL database, etc. All of the data does not come in-built. So, the moment you start building it, if it creates a problem, you have to remove and reinstall everything from scratch and then come back, which takes a lot of time. So, it is better to have those prerequisites handy, pre-installed, and tested.

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

My advice to others using Fortify WebInspect is not to use it, there are better solutions in the market.

I rate Fortify WebInspect a five out of ten.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We are using this WebInspect in conjunction with Fortify. We're not using the client-host based deployment, but rather, a web-based one. The agent is not installed on my machine.

The suitability of this product depends on your use case. If you're trying to do what we're doing in QA and security then it's probably great. If, however, you want to do things on external sites then I would suggest an external cloud-based one.

I would rate this solution a four out of ten.

While we generally like WebINspect, if a client has a smaller budget, we might suggest Acunetix simply because it is cheaper. However, if a customer's priority was better scanning for their application, we would suggest WebInspect. We like to give our clients options and choices. We prefer to provide them with options that meet their needs and address their pain points.

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten. If the price was a bit better, I would rate them higher.

Yes, I would recommend WebInspect. It is a good product, comparable to AppScan. It is quite scalable, and good cost/value with the support and backing from Micro Focus. It's good and I definitely recommend it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give it an eight.

I am currently evolving, going through the product. We have yet to go through all the features and functionalities of the product. The way it checks for vulnerabilities helps a lot. It makes the most of the check for vulnerabilities. The centralized dashboard for the management is good but I'm still looking into it. That and other features we are yet to be discovered. I'm still trying to get to know all the features.

Looking at an enterprise level product is good. With it, you get a centralized board, you have a management view, enroll management and access management. Everything is there. But still, check your requirements, what you need. If you use it for a certain amount of applications, you might not need such a heavy tool.

Our requirement is 10 or 20 times more than a regular company and hence we went with an enterprise solution and had somebody who could implement this. If your requirement is a little less, it might just call for some other scanners based on your requirements. 

If you do need such an extensive requirement, ensure that you also have the data servers and systems for such tools. It will be easy to implement in any environment if you do.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I would recommend WebInspect to enterprise-level organizations. to use. For a smaller company, I'd recommend something more automated. WebInspect has far more manual work, however, it does have good documentation. 

Overall, I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We're using the public cloud deployment model. Our provider is Microsoft.

We just chose the solutions for dynamic scanning and static scanning, but we haven't performed any scanning yet.

I'd recommend it; I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I rate it five out of 10. I was not very impressed.

It's a good product, but get a license for cloud-based, if available.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Currently, I'm satisfied with the solution. I would rate this product a 7 out of 10.