Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

FortiDevSec vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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

FortiDevSec
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
22nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (36th)
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of FortiDevSec is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.9%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammed Jaffir - PeerSpot reviewer
Scans codes in CI/CD pipelines and identifies vulnerabilities
In a customer environment, developers integrate their code with CI/CD pipelines. Most developers use cloud platforms like AWS or Azure and project management tools. FortiDevSec integrates with these CI/CD pipelines using agents such as YAML files. Once integrated, FortiDevSec scans the source code using our product or within the IDE. The most valuable feature is the ability to identify known vulnerabilities in applications by generating reports easily. This development gamification is very useful for developers. Compared to TechSmart and Fortify, FortiDevSec has similar features, but it is much easier to use because of its simple setup. SysTrack, for example, is not very simple. For the CI/CD pipeline, we only need to integrate a YAML file into the security process. Compared to other products, the tool requires fewer steps. We must integrate one file with the CI/CD pipeline, automatically pulling the code report to the repository. Using our API and username, it is easy to scan the environment. The tool's integration is also easy.
Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In a customer environment, developers integrate their code with CI/CD pipelines. Most developers use cloud platforms like AWS or Azure and project management tools. FortiDevSec integrates with these CI/CD pipelines using agents such as YAML files. Once integrated, FortiDevSec scans the source code using our product or within the IDE."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"The installation was easy."
"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 user interface is good."
"It is valuable in improving our overall security posture by catching significant errors."
"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."
"Once we have our project created with our application pipeline connected to the test scanning, it only takes two minutes. The report explaining what needs to be modified related to security and vulnerabilities in our code is very helpful. We are able to do static and dynamic code scanning."
"The most valuable feature is that it connects with your development platforms, such as Microsoft Information Server and Jira."
 

Cons

"The only drawback I see with FortiDevSec is the lack of extensions."
"They could provide features for artificial intelligence similar to other vendors."
"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."
"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."
"They have a release coming out, which is full of new features. Based on their roadmap, there's nothing that I would suggest for them to put in it that they haven't already suggested. However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved. I am working with them on that, and they're very flexible. They work with their customers and kind of tailor the product to the customer's needs. So far, I am very happy with what they're able to provide. Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but that would be about it."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"The products must provide better integration with build tools."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with FortiDevSec?
The only drawback I see with FortiDevSec is the lack of extensions.
What advice do you have for others considering FortiDevSec?
We have implemented FortiDevSec for one customer for a year. It has been implemented successfully, and we haven't received any complaints from them. Since it's been used by only one customer, if we...
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?
In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: July 2025.
864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.