We performed a comparison between Digital.ai Application Security and Fortify on Demand based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."I used the tool to prepare for the interview as a Business Developer. It helped me improve my understanding on software security."
"The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"Almost all the features are good. This solution has simplified designing and architecting for our solutions. We were early adopters of microservices. Their documentation is good. You don't need to put in much effort in setting it up and learning stuff from scratch and start using it. The learning curve is not too much."
"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."
"There is not only one specific feature that we find valuable. The idea is to integrate the solution in DevSecOps which we were able to do."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"The scanning capabilities, particularly for our repositories, have been invaluable."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"I would like the tool to integrate AI and automation that is dedicated to detecting software vulnerabilities."
"Integration to CI/CD pipelines could be improved. The reporting format could be more user friendly so that it is easy to read."
"It lacks of some important features that the competitors have, such as Software Composition Analysis, full dead code detection, and Agile Alliance's Best Practices and Technical Debt."
"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."
"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."
"The products must provide better integration with build tools."
"We typically do our bulk uploads of our scans with some automation at the end of the development cycle but the scanning can take a lot of time. If you were doing all of it at regular intervals it would still consume a lot of time. This could procedure could improve."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"We want a user-based control and role-based access for developers. We want to give limited access to developers so that it only pertains to the code that they write and scanning of the codes for any vulnerabilities as they're progressing with writing the code. As of now, the interface to give restricted access to the developers is not the best. It gives them more access than what is basically required, but we don't want over-provisioning and over-access."
Digital.ai Application Security is ranked 36th in Application Security Tools with 1 review while Fortify on Demand is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 56 reviews. Digital.ai Application Security is rated 6.0, while Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital.ai Application Security writes "Helps to improve knowledge on software security ". 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 ". Digital.ai Application Security is most compared with SonarQube, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Fortify Application Defender, whereas Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect.
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.