"Veracode's technical support is great. They assigned us a TAM and once a week, we have a brief engagement with the TAM to verify that everything's going well. If we have any outstanding issues, they get serviced and addressed."
"It is easy to use for us developers. It supports so many languages: C#, .NET Core, .NET Framework, and it even scans some of our JavaScript. You just need the extension to upload the files and the reports are generated with so much detail."
"Veracode provides guidance for fixing vulnerabilities. It enables developers to write secure code from the start by pointing them to the problematic line of code, and saying, "This function/method has security vulnerabilities," then suggests alternatives to fix it. Then, we adopt their suggestions of the tool. By implementing it in the right way, we can fix the issue. For example, if the tool has found a method where it copied one piece of memory into another piece of memory in the code. The tool points to problematic methods with the vulnerability and provides ways to code it more securely. By adopting their suggestions, we are fixing this vulnerability."
"It is SaaS hosted. That makes it very convenient to use. There is no initial time needed to set up an application. Scanning is a matter of minutes. You just log in, create an application profile, associate a security configuration, and that's about it. It takes 10 minutes to start. The lack of initial lead time or initial overhead to get going is the primary advantage."
"It's comprehensive from a feature standpoint."
"Good static analysis and dynamic analysis."
"The time savings has been tremendous. We saw ROI in the first six months."
"Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers."
"It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."
"This is a stable solution."
"AppScan is stable."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"It was easy to set up."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"The HCL AppScan turnaround time for Burp Suite or any new feature request is pretty good, and that is why we are sticking with the HCL."
"The solution is stable."
"For pentesting scenarios, this is the number one tool. It can capture the request, and there are so many functions that are very good for that. For example, a black box satellite host."
"The active scanner, which does an automated search of any web vulnerabilities."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
"I find the attack model quite amazing, where I can write my scripts and load my scripts as well, which helps quite a bit. All the active scanning that it can do is also quite a lot helpful. It speeds up our vulnerability assessment and penetration testing. Right now, I am enjoying its in-browser, which also helps quite a bit. I'm always confused about setting up some proxy, but it really is the big solution we all want."
"There is no other tool like it. I like the intuitiveness and the plugins that are available."
"We use the solution for vulnerability assessment in respect of the application and the sites."
"In my area of expertise, I feel like it has almost everything I could possibly require at this moment."
"There is much to be desired of UI and user experience. The UI is very slow. With every click, it just takes a lot of time for the pages to load. We have seen this consistently since getting this solution. The UI and UX are very disjointed."
"The policies you have, where you can tune the findings you get, don't allow you not to file tickets about certain findings. It will always report the findings, even if you know you're not that concerned about a library writing to a system log, for example. It will keep raising them, even though you may have a ticket about it. The integration will keep updating the ticket every time the scan runs."
"The reports on offer are too verbose."
"The pricing for qualified startups such as Neo4j could be improved."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"We tried to create an automatic scanning process for Veracode and integrate it into our billing process, but it was easier to adopt it to repositories based on GIT. Until now, our source control repository was Azure DevOps Server (Microsoft TFS) to managing our resources. This was not something that they supported. It took us some sessions together before we successfully implemented it."
"The ideal situation in terms of putting the results in front of the developers would be with Veracode integration into the developer environment (IDE). They do have a plugin, which we've used in the past, but we were not as positive about it."
"We have experienced challenges when trying to integrate this solution with other products. When you compare it with the other SecOps products, the quality of the output is too low. It is not a new-age product. It is very outdated."
"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."
"Sometimes it doesn't work so well."
"AppScan is too complicated and should be made more user-friendly."
"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"They have to improve support."
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional can improve by having more features in the free version for beginners to try."
"The use of system memory is an area that can be improved because it uses a lot."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
"Sometimes the solution can run a little slow."
"We wish that the Spider feature would appear in the same shape that it does in previous versions."
"As with most automated security tools, too many false positives."
"I am from Brazil. The currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep. It is almost six to one. It would be good if it can be sold in the local currency, and its price is cheaper for us."
"There could be an improvement in the API security testing. There is another tool called Postman and if we had a built-in portal similar to Postman which captures the API, we would be able to generate the API traffic. Right now we need a Postman tool and the Burp Suite for performing API tests. It would be a huge benefit to be able to do it in a single UI."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
HCL AppScan is ranked 15th in Application Security Tools with 8 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 6.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes "Improves application security, identifies gaps, and performs well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "Best for manual penetration testing, a great user interface, and offers good scanning capabilities". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx, Fortify WebInspect and Acunetix, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Tenable.io Web Application Scanning. See our HCL AppScan vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
