No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

GitHub Advanced Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitHub Advanced Security is 2.9%, down from 8.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.1%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
GitHub Advanced Security2.9%
OpenText Core Application Security3.1%
Other94.0%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Devendiran Kandan - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Security scanning has protected our pipelines but currently needs clearer dashboards and controls
We used additional third-party solutions, but we replaced them with GitHub Advanced Security, even though I do not have a very good opinion about GitHub Advanced Security. Even though it is an inline product, I'm not seeing user-friendly things in GitHub Advanced Security. Dependent bots and the secret detection are good compared to others. However, code scanning is not finding very good results based on pipeline where it will scan and do code scanning. While build, before building and deploying the code, we want to block or do an advanced model, but it is not supporting. During deployment, code scanning is not good. It is a little complicated. It is not a straightforward method we can complete. We need expertise to get the full benefit, and troubleshooting sometimes requires going through that. The security overview dashboard is not really clear. It's not showing centralized information; each repo is showing, but if you compare it with competitors, it is not that great. Mainly in the centralized dashboard, enterprise level needs to improve. A centralized way where we can get that overall view is needed, and we want that code scanning and blocking deployments based on security. There are AI improvements, but however, it is not so easy to configure. It is multiple windows we need to go through and make changes or configure that. A few things we need to enable going into settings, and a few things we can find out in security. One product where security means the security dashboard should cover everything, but it is going here and there in many places.
Himanshu_Tyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Cybersecurity at TBO
Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration
If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"GitHub Advanced Security is ten out of ten scalable."
"The best features of GitHub Advanced Security are its flexibility and the multiple options it has compared to other tools."
"GitHub Advanced Security's secret scanning is good."
"GitHub Advanced Security uses artificial intelligence in the backend, specifically CodeQL, to analyze code and provide fewer but more reliable findings, so there are less false positives."
"GitHub Advanced Security is a very developer-friendly solution that is integrated within my development environment."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"The initial setup was straightforward and completed in a matter of minutes."
"I have not experienced any performance or stability issues with GitHub Advanced Security."
"We identified a lot of security vulnerability much earlier in the development and could fix this well before the product was rolled out to a huge number of clients."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved."
"The biggest advantage of this tool, Fortify on Demand, is that it is very scalable; it provides all the features just in time, and you do not need to have massive deployment or a lot of compute capabilities to use the product—that's the beauty of it."
"If somebody wants to shift left or integrate security early on in the CI/CD pipeline from a DevOps standpoint, this is probably one of the best tools available."
"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"Fortify supports most languages, integrates with lots of tools, and has API support, whereas other tools are limited to typical languages and IBM's solutions are not flexible enough to support any language."
 

Cons

"Open-source security vulnerabilities are not getting updated in a timely manner."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
"GitHub Advanced Security should look into API security issues, which they currently do not. Additionally, open-source security vulnerabilities are not getting updated in a timely manner."
"The reporting feature might need improvement. While it integrates seamlessly with my workflow, it doesn't provide management with oversight, such as statistics and the number of vulnerabilities."
"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
"Maybe make it compatible with more programming languages. Have a customized ruleset where the end-user can create their own rules for scanning."
"For GitHub Advanced Security, I would like to see more support for various programming languages."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems."
"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."
"I would say OpenText Core Application Security is not very user-friendly in terms of price; it is quite high."
"It would be highly beneficial if Fortify on Demand incorporated runtime analysis, similar to how Contrast Security utilizes agents for proactive application security."
"Reporting could be improved. It would nice to export to an Excel sheet or another spreadsheet."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"They can also improve the securability a bit more because security is one of the biggest aspects these days when you are using the cloud."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The current licensing model, which relies on active commitments, poses challenges, particularly in predicting and managing growth."
"There are different costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand depending on the assessments you want to use. There is only a standard license needed to use the solution."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"I'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise45
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with GitHub Advanced Security?
We used additional third-party solutions, but we replaced them with GitHub Advanced Security, even though I do not have a very good opinion about GitHub Advanced Security. Even though it is an inli...
What is your primary use case for GitHub Advanced Security?
I'm working with software development nowadays. As a process, we are using the dependent bot alerts and the code scanning for Java, and some of the code scanning is happening. Security secrets in c...
What advice do you have for others considering GitHub Advanced Security?
Dependent bots and the secret detection are good compared to others. However, code scanning is not finding very good results based on pipeline where it will scan and do code scanning. While build, ...
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?
Areas for improvement should be contextualized post the OpenText acquisition, but back when I was working with Micro Focus, they focused heavily on enterprise-centric solutions. Now, after the acqu...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
For OpenText Core Application Security, I currently support a couple of my clients who are using Fortify on Demand for their web application, CRM, and sales platform. Many good features of Fortify ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Advanced Security vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.