We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender and Spirent CyberFlood 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 main feature that I have found valuable is the solution's ability to find issues in static analysis. Additionally, there are plenty of useful tools."
"Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers."
"The policy reporting for ensuring compliance with industry standards and regulations is pretty comprehensive, especially around PCI. If you do the static analysis, the dynamic analysis, and then a manual penetration test, it aggregates all of these results into one report. And then they create a PCI-specific report around it which helps to illustrate how the application adheres to different standards."
"The solution's ability to prevent vulnerable code from going into production is perfectly fine. It delivers, at least for the reports that we have been checking on Java and JavaScript. It has reported things that were helpful."
"The Veracode technical support is very good. They are responsive and very knowledgeable."
"You can easily integrate it with Azure DevOps. This is an added value because we work with Azure DevOps. Veracode is natively supported and we don't have to work with APIs."
"The static scan is the feature that we use the most, as it gives us insight into our source code. We have it integrated with our continuous integration, continuous delivery system, so we can get insight quickly."
"Veracode's technical support is great. They assigned us a TAM and once a week, we have a brief engagement with the TAM to verify that everything's going well. If we have any outstanding issues, they get serviced and addressed."
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"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."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"Sometimes the scans are not done quickly, but the solutions that it provides are really good. The quality is high, but the analysis is not done extremely quickly."
"The ideal situation in terms of putting the results in front of the developers would be with Veracode integration into the developer environment (IDE). They do have a plugin, which we've used in the past, but we were not as positive about it."
"The product has issues with scanning."
"Scheduling can be a little difficult. For instance, if you set up recurring scheduled scans and a developer comes in and says, "Hey, I have this critical release that happened outside of our normal release patterns and they want you to scan it," we actually have to change our schedule configuration and that means we lose the recurring scheduling settings we had."
"The training lab is not very user-friendly and takes a long time to set up."
"The static analysis is prone to a lot of false positives. But that's how it is with most static analysis tools... Also, the static analysis can sometimes take a little while. The time that it takes to do a scan should be improved."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"If Veracode was more diversified, as far as the number of platforms and the number of applications it could do in our favor, we would be using it even more. But there are a number of platforms it doesn't support. For example, I know they support C+, .NET, and Java, but there are certain platforms they don't support and that was disappointing."
"Fortify Application Defender could improve by supporting more code languages, such as GRAAS and Groovy."
"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 licensing can be a little complex."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
Fortify Application Defender is ranked 22nd in Application Security Tools with 3 reviews while Spirent CyberFlood is ranked 28th in Application Security Tools with 1 review. Fortify Application Defender is rated 8.0, while Spirent CyberFlood is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Secure, versatile cyber security technology ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spirent CyberFlood writes "Powerful and user-friendly". Fortify Application Defender is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx, Coverity, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand and CAST Highlight, whereas Spirent CyberFlood is most compared with Ixia BreakingPoint and Ixia BreakingPoint VE.
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.
