We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and Mend.io based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution...The initial setup or installation of HCL AppScan is easy."
"Usually when we deploy the application, there is a process for ethical hacking. The main benefit is that, the ethical hacking is almost clean, every time. So it's less cost, less effort, less time to production."
"We use it as a security testing application."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."
"I like the recording feature."
"It's generally a very user-friendly tool. Anyone can easily learn how to scan"
"The reporting capability gives us the option to generate an open-source license report in a single click, which gets all copyright and license information, including dependencies."
"We find licenses together with WhiteSource which are associated with a certain library, then we get a classification of the license. This is with respect to criticality and vulnerability, so we could take action and improve some things, or replace a third-party library which seems to be too risky for us to use on legal grounds."
"I am the organizational deployment administrator for this tool, and I, along with other users in our company, especially the security team, appreciate the solution for several reasons. The UI is excellent, and scanning for security threats fits well into our workflow."
"There are multiple different integrations there. We use Mend for CI/CD that goes through Azure as well. It works seamlessly. We never have any issues with it."
"Our dev team uses the fix suggestions feature to quickly find the best path for remediation."
"We set the solution up and enabled it and we had everything running pretty quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the unified JAR to scan for all langs (wss-scanner jar)."
"The overall support that we receive is pretty good. "
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"They should have a better UI for dashboards."
"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."
"It's a little bit basic when you talk about the Web Services. If AppScan improved its maturity on Web Services testing, that would be good."
"If HCL AppScan is able to alert the clients over email once the scan is complete, it would be great. Right now, HCL AppScan doesn't let me know if the scanning part is finished or not, because of which I have to come back and check mostly."
"The solution often has a high number of false positives. It's an aspect they really need to improve upon."
"Many silly false positives are produced."
"WhiteSource needs improvement in the scanning of the containers and images with distinguishing the layers."
"We specifically use this solution within our CICD pipelines in Azure DevOps, and we would like to have a gate so that if the score falls below a certain value then we can block the pipeline from running."
"WhiteSource only produces a report, which is nice to look at. However, you have to check that report every week, to see if something was found that you don't want. It would be great if the build that's generating a report would fail if it finds a very important vulnerability, for instance."
"The solution lacks the code snippet part."
"I would like to have an additional compliance pack. Currently, it does not have anything for the CIS framework or the NIST framework. If we directly run a scan, and it is under the CIS framework, we can directly tell the auditor that this product is now CIS compliant."
"They're working on a UI refresh. That's probably been one of the pain points for us as it feels like a really old application."
"On the reporting side, they could make some improvements. They are making the reports better and better, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to generate a report for our entire organization."
"Some detected libraries do not specify a location of where in the source they were matched from, which is something that should be enhanced to enable quicker troubleshooting."
HCL AppScan is ranked 14th in Application Security Tools with 39 reviews while Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.6, while Mend.io is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, Checkmarx One and Invicti, whereas Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Snyk, Checkmarx One and Fortify on Demand. See our HCL AppScan vs. Mend.io report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.