We performed a comparison between Apiiro and Fortify on Demand based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly."
"The workflow automation is likely the best aspect of the solution."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."
"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"The static code analyzers are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"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."
"The solution is user-friendly."
"I would like support for our self-hosted Git server, other than GitHub, just regular Git."
"User management is a little bit clunky."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"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."
"New technologies and DevOps could be improved. Fortify on Demand can be slow (slower than other vendors) to support new technologies or new software versions."
"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"It does scanning for all virtual machines and other things, but it doesn't do the scanning for containers. It currently lacks the ability to do the scanning on containers. We're asking their product management team to expand this capability to containers."
"In terms of communication, they can integrate a few more third-party tools. It would be great if we can have more options for microservice communication. They can also improve the securability a bit more because security is one of the biggest aspects these days when you are using the cloud. Some more security features would be really helpful."
"An improvement would be the ability to get vulnerabilities flowing automatically into another system."
Apiiro is ranked 21st in Application Security Testing (AST) with 2 reviews while Fortify on Demand is ranked 9th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 56 reviews. Apiiro is rated 8.6, while Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Apiiro writes "A great secrets detection feature, good visibility, and integrates well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". Apiiro is most compared with Snyk, Cycode, Ox Security, SonarQube and Checkmarx One, whereas Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect. See our Apiiro vs. Fortify on Demand report.
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.
