We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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."The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"We are able to provide out customers with a secure application after development. They are no longer left wondering if they are vulnerable to different threats within the market following deployment."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"The intercepting feature is the most valuable."
"Enables automation of different tasks such as authorization testing."
"The feature that we have found most valuable is that it comes with pre-set configurations. They have a set of predefined options where you can pick one and start scanning. We also have the option of creating our own configurations, like how often do the applications need to be scanned."
"The Repeater and the BApp extensions are particularly useful. Certain extensions, such as the Active Scan extensions and the Autoracer extension, are very good."
"The solution is quite helpful for session management and configuration."
"I am impressed with the tool's detailed analysis for penetration testing. AppScan can give only visibility, but it can't do the PT part. But the PortSwigger Burp Application can do both, and it gives much more visibility on the PT rating."
"The solution has a limited range of functions, which is good for small companies. This is because, in small companies, websites are less complex. They also have single services which makes the solution good enough for them. However, the most advantageous aspect of the solution is its affordable price."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"It would be good if the solution could give us more details about what exactly is defective."
"It should provide a better way to integrate with Jenkins so that DAST (dynamic application security testing) can be automated."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The solution is not easy to set it up. You need a lot of knowledge."
"The pricing of the solution is quite high."
"Scanning needs to be improved in enterprise and professional versions."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
"The Iran market does not have after-sales support. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional needs to provide after-sales support."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortify Application Defender is ranked 34th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 55 reviews. Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Reliable solution with excellent machine learning algorithms but expensive and lacking support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Checkmarx One, Coverity, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, SonarQube and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our Fortify Application Defender vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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.
