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

OpenText Core Application Security vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec 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
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (11th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th)
Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (5th), AI Observability (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Core Application Security is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 3.3%, down 4.2% compared to last year.
Rapid7 InsightAppSec, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 5.7% mindshare, up 4.8% since last year.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.3%
SonarQube11.8%
Checkmarx One8.0%
Other76.9%
Application Security Tools
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Rapid7 InsightAppSec5.7%
Checkmarx One13.9%
Veracode13.8%
Other66.6%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Shritam Bhowmick - PeerSpot reviewer
Vulnerability Management Lead at garrett
Provides reliable applications security but needs better integration options
There are areas for improvements regarding false positives. Integration capabilities are lacking, as options for integrations with other tools such as SNOW, Jira, or other integration tools are not sufficient in Rapid7 InsightAppSec. The user interface sometimes has glitches, which may prevent appropriate results during navigation, and even when we get appropriate results, it can be impossible to export them to CSV records or download files. Regarding scalability, Rapid7 InsightAppSec is not a scalable solution for our industry due to limited integration capabilities. Rapid7 relies on another tool called InsightConnect, which requires additional investment, detracting from scalability. Another area that needs improvement is the integration of AI capabilities into the platform. Both Rapid7 InsightAppSec and InsightVM need to advance in that area. In terms of behavioral and pattern recognition, identifying complex attacks such as SQL, blind SQL, JSON, and LDAP injections often results in 94% false positives. This necessitates improvement in their behavioral-based analytics feature.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Security defects are captured early in the lifecycle and fixed quicker."
"The solution is very fast."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."
"The solution saves us a lot of money, and we're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand is a very easy-to-use solution."
"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."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is a good product for dynamic application security testing, providing neat reports that include validation actions and helping to generate web application firewall rules for web applications."
"This is a product that I recommend and my advice for anybody who is interested in trying it, there is a free 60-day trial period where they will fix your problems without any payment."
"The solution is stable."
"It's very easy to use and user-friendly, and it does the job."
"It uses a signature-based method to check for problems with your code and will provide an alert if anything is found."
"The automatic automation of the automated authorization to the SCANNET environment is valuable."
"It is very convenient to get reports from the tool, which offers high-level environmental statistics."
"Customers use the product for scanning purposes and do not want to be restricted with respect to the number of scans they perform."
 

Cons

"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed."
"It could use better integration with the incident management processor."
"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to."
"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."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"If you're a beginner, give Fortify a go. If you're a professional, it might be worth looking at other tools because Fortify does have limitations when it comes to scalability and executable codes."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems."
"When you add new projects for the same product, it either duplicates or replaces the scan configuration. If I run a scan for the same product with a different scan configuration, it should keep the previous scan configuration and not replace it with the new scan configuration. It should just add the new scan configuration. That would be helpful. They do keep the results as it is, but the scan configuration keeps changing. For example, I have set a scan configuration to a full scan, and next week, I want to run a new scan for the same product with some changes or new functionalities. I want to run a partial scan. Currently, if I change the scan configuration to partial, it changes the old one also to partial. That should be improved."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
"They should add more features. I would like to see them do a little more on static analysis and also interactivity analysis. Currently, it does very basic static analysis. It could do a little more static analysis, which is something that would help. A lot more interactivity analysis should also be there. It should basically look at security during interactivity."
"Customers sometimes experience issues with performance."
"There is room for improvement in the response time of customer service and support levels."
"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work. We found that we'd try to use widgets, but often getting them to work for us wasn't very clear. They need to be more user friendly or offer better instructions."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
"There is room for improvement in Rapid7 InsightAppSec by giving clients the ability for extra columns on reports and enabling the extraction of remediation reports into a CSV format. Currently, the PDF format is cumbersome to go through when dealing with thousands of pages."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"They offer a good price, but I don't remember its cost. It is fair as compared to the competition. We have opted for project-based licensing, not user-based. We can add any number of users. That doesn't matter. It is worth the money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
Customers sometimes experience issues with performance. One thing that I recall is that most customers often want to have reporting as per their customized dashboard. This needs to be improved beca...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
I usually recommend this solution for financial institutions. Banks and financial institutions need this solution mostly because they have to follow stringent compliance advisory requirements, so t...
What advice do you have for others considering Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
I have not heard any complaints. I do not have any recommendations because customers were initially worried about the number of scans they used to perform, and now it has been enhanced or it will s...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
InsightAppSec
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
CenterPoint Energy, CPA Australia, Hypertherm, First American Financial Corporation, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: July 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.