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

OpenText Core Application Security 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

OpenText Core Application S...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (14th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)
OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Core Application Security is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 4.3%, down 5.1% compared to last year.
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 22.2% mindshare, down 30.5% since last year.
Application Security Tools
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.
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

"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"We have the option to test applications with or without credentials."
"It is an extremely robust, scalable, and stable solution."
"The licensing was good."
"What stands out to me is the user-friendliness of each feature."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"The solution is user-friendly. One feature I find very effective is the tool's automatic scanning capability. It scans replicas of the code developers write and automatically detects any vulnerabilities. The integration with CI/CD tools is also useful for plugins."
"The source code analyzer is the most effective for identifying security vulnerabilities."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"It is easy to use, and its reporting is fairly simple."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the ability to make our customers more secure."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"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."
 

Cons

"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"We want a user-based control and role-based access for developers. We want to give limited access to developers so that it only pertains to the code that they write and scanning of the codes for any vulnerabilities as they're progressing with writing the code. As of now, the interface to give restricted access to the developers is not the best. It gives them more access than what is basically required, but we don't want over-provisioning and over-access."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."
"An improvement would be the ability to get vulnerabilities flowing automatically into another system."
"Fortify on Demand needs to improve its pricing."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"It could have a little bit more streamlined installation procedure. Based on the things that I've done, it could also be a bit more automated. It is kind of taking a bunch of different scanners, and SSC is just kind of managing the results. The scanning doesn't really seem to be fully integrated into the SSC platform. More automation and any kind of integration in the SSC platform would definitely be good. There could be a way to initiate scans from SSC and more functionality on the server-side to initiate desk scans if it is not already available."
"The scanner could be better."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"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."
"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."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"The price is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
In comparison with other tools, they're competitive. It is not more expensive than other solutions, but their pricing is competitive. The licenses for Fortify On Demand are generally bought in unit...
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...
What do you like most about Fortify WebInspect?
The solution's technical support was very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
The price of Fortify WebInspect is high, with the cost depending on the number of virtual users. It is approximately 25% higher than other solutions.
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate. The cost of the license depends on the number of virtual users and, in comparison to...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Aaron's
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Core Application Security vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
860,745 professionals have used our research since 2012.