We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and GitHub Advanced Security 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 UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."
"One of the top features is the source code review for vulnerabilities. When we look at source code, it's hard to see where areas may be weak in terms of security, and Fortify on Demand's source code review helps with that."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"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."
"Fortify on Demand's best feature is that there's no need to install and configure it locally since it's on the cloud."
"The licensing was good."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part."
"There's a bit of a learning curve. Our development team is struggling with following the rules and following the new processes."
"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent. When we are coding the endpoint it will not work, we have to use Windows Agent. This is something they could improve."
"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"The Visual Studio plugin seems to hang when a scan is run on big projects. I would expect some improvements there."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand can improve by having more graphs. For example, to show the improvement of the level of security."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"There could be DST features included in the product."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."
"The report limitations are the main issue."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 56 reviews while GitHub Advanced Security is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 6 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while GitHub Advanced Security is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub Advanced Security writes "A tool that provides ease of integration with the set of existing codes in an infrastructure". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify Software Security Center, whereas GitHub Advanced Security is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode, Checkmarx One and GitLab. See our Fortify on Demand vs. GitHub Advanced Security 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.
