We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Rapid7 AppSpider 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."It's a stable and scalable solution."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."
"The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"It improves future security scans."
"The setup is usually straightforward."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
"The most valuable feature of Rapid7 AppSpider is the vulnerability reporting data. Additionally, the data is reported in a convenient way rather than seeing them as a PDF. We are able to generate all the reports exactly what we want in a flexible way."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"AppSpider's most valuable feature is reporting - everything is stored in the local database so it can be sent to other machines."
"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"They could provide features for artificial intelligence similar to other vendors."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand can improve by having more graphs. For example, to show the improvement of the level of security."
"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."
"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."
"The product needs to be able to scale for large companies, like ours. We have millions of IP addresses that need to be scanned, and the scalability is not great."
"It needs better integration with mobile applications."
"The dashboard and interface are crucial and they need some improvement."
"Integration could be better."
"The enterprise interface is too simple. It should be more customizable."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"The performance of the solution could improve. When I compare the speed it is slower than others on the market. There are some tricks we use to help speed up the solution."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 9th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 56 reviews while Rapid7 AppSpider is ranked 25th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 13 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Rapid7 AppSpider is rated 7.8. 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 Rapid7 AppSpider writes "Useful vulnerability reporting data, flexible, and simple implementation". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Veracode, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Rapid7 AppSpider is most compared with Rapid7 InsightAppSec, OWASP Zap, Acunetix, Invicti and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning. See our Fortify on Demand vs. Rapid7 AppSpider 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.
