Contrast Security Assess vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

The compared Contrast Security and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. Contrast Security is ranked #28 in SAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 0.5% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #3 in DAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 22.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 82% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

762 Views
99 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Read 21 OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing reviews

788 Views
308 Comparison Views

82% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Contrast Security Assess and OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Report (Updated: May 2022).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

May 2022

Download the complete report

Helped 858,038 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Contrast Security Assess

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (30th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (28th)

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (10th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. Contrast Security Assess is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 0.5%, up 0.4% compared to last year.
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 22.8% mindshare, down 31.3% since last year.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Featured Reviews

ToddMcAlister

Lead Application and Data Security Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

It has an excellent API interface to pull APIs.

Assess has brought our development time down because it helps create code the first time. Instead of going through the Jenkins process to build an application, they can see right off the bat that if there are errors in the code and fix them before it even goes to build.

Read full review

Navin N

Global ISO 27001 Program Lead at DXC Technology

Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution

We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this. Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."

"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."

"The solution is easy to use."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."

"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."

"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."

"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."

"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing pros

Cons

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."

"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."

"We have had a problem with authentification."

"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."

"We have often encountered scanning errors."

"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."

"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."

"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"The solution is expensive."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"This solution is very expensive."

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."

"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."

"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."

"It’s a fair price for the solution."

"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."

"The price is okay."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

858,038 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

10%

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

17%

Government

14%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

Contrast Security Assess is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Contrast Security Assess to other users. It's a really good tool. It provides lots of details on web-based vulne...

See all answers

What do you like most about Fortify WebInspect?

The solution's technical support was very helpful.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?

The price of Fortify WebInspect is high, with the cost depending on the number of virtual users. It is approximately 25% higher than other solutions.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?

The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate. The cost of the license depends on the number of virtual users and, in comparison to...

See all answers

Comparisons

Seeker vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 14% of the time

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 21% of the time

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 13% of the time

Acunetix vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 10% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 9% of the time

Appknox vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

June 2025

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

June 2025

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report

Download OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing offers robust scalability, ease of use, and high accuracy in scanning, making it a valuable tool for enterprises.

This security testing platform is known for its centralized dashboard, guided scans, and comprehensive reporting. It integrates seamlessly with tools like Fortify code scanner and supports extensive vulnerability detection and analysis, enhancing efficiency in security management. Despite its strengths, users suggest improvements in cloud integration, cost-effectiveness, and installation processes. Faster scans, reduced false positives, and improved mobile testing features are also desired.

What are the key features of OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing?

Scalability: Easily adapts to changing enterprise needs.
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface with guided scans.
Comprehensive Reporting: Detailed vulnerability analysis and reporting.
Integration Capabilities: Works with Fortify code scanner and user authentication scanning.
Wide Vulnerability Detection: Identifies extensive security vulnerabilities.

What benefits should users expect from reviews?

Efficient Vulnerability Management: Streamlines security management in development environments.
Detailed Analysis: Provides in-depth insights into security issues.
Quick Setup: Easy to deploy within existing systems.
Enterprise Preference: Supports enterprise environments efficiently.

In industries like BFSI, OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is employed for performance network application testing, dynamic and static application security testing, and code checks. Security and QA teams use it in development processes to ensure application security prior to release, proving integral in both enterprise and testing environments.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Aaron's

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

May 2022

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing

Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.

DOWNLOAD NOW

858,038 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing report.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.