We performed a comparison between Cisco SecureX 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."Using SecureX, a tool provided by Cisco, we can easily integrate it with many of our other Cisco products such as Cisco ISE and many networking devices."
"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."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"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 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."
"Our customers find the product's third-party integrations valuable. Our customers are also impressed with the tool's capability to pick up third-party threat feeds and use that as part of the decision-making process."
"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 ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"It's generally a very user-friendly tool. Anyone can easily learn how to scan"
"I like the recording feature."
"AppScan is stable."
"Usually when we deploy the application, there is a process for ethical hacking. The main benefit is that, the ethical hacking is almost clean, every time. So it's less cost, less effort, less time to production."
"It was easy to set up."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"The solution is easy to use."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"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."
"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."
"The playbooks provided with the product are great, although I would appreciate having more playbooks available. Threats are constantly evolving, so having access to updated playbooks is crucial."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"what's missing right now is the multi-tenant capability."
"The documentation can be improved and the on-prem integration. The set of applications that it was integrated with wasn't comprehensive."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"Remediation stuff could be integrated into the product's automation."
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"Many silly false positives are produced."
"The pricing has room for improvement."
"In future releases, I would like to see more aggressive reports. I would also like to see less false positives."
"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."
"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"
"Visibility is an issue for us. Our partners do not know we have integrations with some of IBM products."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
Cisco SecureX is ranked 19th in Application Security Tools with 13 reviews while HCL AppScan is ranked 15th in Application Security Tools with 40 reviews. Cisco SecureX is rated 9.0, while HCL AppScan is rated 7.6. 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 HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". 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 HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional. See our Cisco SecureX vs. HCL AppScan 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.
