We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Ixia BreakingPoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
"The solution is very fast."
"Micro Focus WebInspect and Fortify code analysis tools are fully integrated with SSC portals and can instantly register to error tracking systems, like TFS and JIRA."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"Fortify helps us to stay updated with the newest languages and versions coming out."
"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."
"It is a scalable solution."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"They could provide features for artificial intelligence similar to other vendors."
"The Visual Studio plugin seems to hang when a scan is run on big projects. I would expect some improvements there."
"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."
"New technologies and DevOps could be improved. Fortify on Demand can be slow (slower than other vendors) to support new technologies or new software versions."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"The price could be better."
"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 9th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 56 reviews while Ixia BreakingPoint is ranked 23rd in Application Security Testing (AST) with 8 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Ixia BreakingPoint is rated 8.4. 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 Ixia BreakingPoint writes "Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Ixia BreakingPoint is most compared with Spirent CyberFlood and Synopsys Defensics. See our Fortify on Demand vs. Ixia BreakingPoint report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.