We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand 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."The most valuable features are the detailed reporting and the ability to set up deep scanning of the software, both of which are in the same place."
"I don’t know of any other On-Demand enterprise solution like this one where we can load the details and within a few days, receive the results of intrusion attacks, and work with HP Security Experts when needed for clarification"
"The UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
"Being able to reduce risk overall is a very valuable feature for us."
"The most valuable features are the server, scanning, and it has helped identify issues with the security analysis."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand is the information it can provide. There is quite a lot of information. It can pinpoint right down to where the problem is, allowing you to know where to fix it. Overall the features are easy to use, you don't have to be a coder. You can be a manager, or in IT operations, et cetera, anyone can use it. It is quite a well-rounded functional solution."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"The dashboard view and the management view are most valuable."
"The inventory management as well as the ability to identify security vulnerabilities has been the most valuable for our business."
"We set the solution up and enabled it and we had everything running pretty quickly."
"We can take some measures to improve things, replace a library, or update a library which was too old or showed severe bugs."
"It gives us full visibility into what we're using, what needs to be updated, and what's vulnerable, which helps us make better decisions."
"We use a lot of open sources with a variety of containers, and the different open sources come with different licenses. Some come with dual licenses, some are risky and some are not. All our three use cases are equally important to us and we found WhiteSource handles them decently."
"Its ease of use and good results are the most valuable."
"For us, the most valuable tool was open-source licensing analysis."
"There are many false positives identified by the solution."
"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."
"They have a release coming out, which is full of new features. Based on their roadmap, there's nothing that I would suggest for them to put in it that they haven't already suggested. However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved. I am working with them on that, and they're very flexible. They work with their customers and kind of tailor the product to the customer's needs. So far, I am very happy with what they're able to provide. Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but that would be about it."
"Reporting could be improved."
"The vulnerability analysis does not always provide guidelines for what the developer should do in order to correct the problem, which means that the code has to be manually inspected and understood."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."
"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."
"The dashboard UI and UX are problematic."
"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."
"It would be good if it can do dynamic code analysis. It is not necessarily in that space, but it can do more because we have too many tools. Their partner relationship support is a little bit confusing. They haven't really streamlined the support process when we buy through a reseller. They should improve their process."
"Needs better ACL and more role definitions. This product could be used by large organisations and it definitely needs a better role/action model."
"The only thing that I don't find support for on Mend Prioritize is C++."
"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."
"It would be nice to have a better way to realize its full potential and translate it within the UI or during onboarding."
"I would like to see the static analysis included with the open-source version."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 11th in Application Security Tools with 56 reviews while Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Mend.io is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Veracode, Coverity and Invicti, whereas Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Snyk, Checkmarx One and Coverity. See our Fortify on Demand 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.
