Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Kiuwan vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Kiuwan
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (23rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (25th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. Kiuwan is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 1.1%, up 0.9% compared to last year.
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 17.9% mindshare, down 22.0% since last year.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Kiuwan1.1%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)20.8%
Checkmarx One10.2%
Other67.9%
Application Security Tools
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing17.9%
HCL AppScan14.3%
Checkmarx One13.5%
Other54.3%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala - PeerSpot reviewer
Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.
Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
"The most valuable feature is the time to resolution, where it tells you how long it is going to take to get to a zero-base or a five-star security rating."
"​We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"I've tried many open source applications and the remediation or correction actions that were provided by Kiuwan were very good in comparison."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"Technical support has been good."
"The feature that has been most influential in identifying vulnerabilities is its ability to crawl the website, understand the structure, and analyze the network packets sent and received."
"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
 

Cons

"The development-to-delivery phase."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"The configuration hasn't been that good."
"It could improve its scalability abilities."
"I would like to see better integration with the Visual Studio and Eclipse IDEs."
"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."
"The QA developer and security could be improved."
"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"I want to enhance automation. Currently, Fortify WebInspect can scan and find vulnerabilities, but users with specific skills need to interpret the results and understand how to address them."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"The solution needs better integration with Microsoft's Azure Cloud or an extension of Azure DevOps. In fact, it should better integrate with any cloud provider. Right now, it's quite difficult to integrate with that solution, from the cloud perspective."
"The initial setup was complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
"Check with your account manager."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."
"The price is okay."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"This solution is very expensive."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
University
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Kiuwan?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kiuwan?
I'm not entirely sure about the price and business aspects, but I assume Checkmarx might be less expensive. I think Checkmarx might offer more affordable options, especially in its smaller business...
What needs improvement with Kiuwan?
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produ...
What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?
I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about Kiuwan vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
867,676 professionals have used our research since 2012.