Fortify on Demand vs Seeker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortify on Demand
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th)
Seeker
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
25th
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Fortify on Demand is 4.8%, up from 3.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Seeker is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Unique Categories:
Application Security Tools
5.7%
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

AM
Oct 31, 2023
A highly trusted and comprehensive application security testing solution, known for its seamless integration, advanced technical capabilities, and reliability
We use it to scan the bank's applications systematically. This process aims to identify and address security vulnerabilities within the applications, ensuring the robustness of our security measures It stands out by generating fewer false positives which has a distinct advantage, as it translates…
San K - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 7, 2022
More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need. The purposes for which applications are designed may differ in practice in the industry, and because of this, there will always be tools that sometimes report false positives. Thus, there should be some means with which I can customize the way that Seeker learns about our applications, possibly by using some kind of AI / ML capability within the tool that will automatically reduce the number of false positives that we get as we use the tool over time. Obviously, when we first start using the scanning tool there will be false positives, but as it keeps going and as I keep using the tool, there should be a period of time where either the application can learn how to ignore false positives, or I can customize it do so. Adding this type of functionality would definitely prevent future issues when it comes to reporting false positives, and this is a key area that we have already asked the vendor to improve on, in general. On a different note, there is one feature that isn't completely available right now where you can integrate Seeker with an open-source vulnerability scanner or composition analysis tool such as Black Duck. I would very much like this capability to be available to us out-of-the-box, so that we can easily integrate with tools like Black Duck in such a way that any open source components that are used in the front-end are easily identified. I think this would be a huge plus for Seeker. Another feature within Seeker which could benefit from improvement is active verification, which lets you actively verify a vulnerability. This feature currently doesn't work in certain applications, particularly in scenarios where you have requested tokens. When we bought the tool, we didn't realize this and we were not told about it by the vendor, so initially it was a big challenge for us to overcome it and properly begin our deployment.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Fortify helps us to stay updated with the newest languages and versions coming out."
"The most valuable features are the server, scanning, and it has helped identify issues with the security analysis."
"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
"Fortify supports most languages. Other tools are limited to Java and other typical languages. IBM's solutions aren't flexible enough to support any language. Fortify also integrates with lots of tools because it has API support."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"The feature that I find the most useful is being able to just see the vulnerabilities online while checking the code and then checking suggestions for fixing them."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to submit your code and have it run in the background. Then, if something comes up that is more specific, you have the security analyst who can jump in and help, if needed."
"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
 

Cons

"We would like a reduction in the time frame of scans. It takes us three to five days to run a scan now. We would like that reduced to under three days."
"Fortify on Demand could be improved with support in Russia."
"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to."
"The thing that could be improved is reducing the cost of usage and including some of the most pricey features, such as dynamic analysis and that sort of functionality, which makes the difference between different types of tools."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the reports. They could benefit from being more user-friendly and intuitive."
"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."
"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten.
What do you like most about Seeker?
A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppSca...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Seeker?
The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year.
What needs improvement with Seeker?
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. Ho...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
El Al Airlines and Société Française du Radiotelephone
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: June 2024.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.