Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Rapid7 AppSpider 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 Dynamic Applicatio...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th), DevSecOps (9th)
Rapid7 AppSpider
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (30th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 11.3%, up 9.2% compared to last year.
Rapid7 AppSpider, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 0.6% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing11.3%
Veracode23.2%
Checkmarx One19.7%
Other45.8%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Rapid7 AppSpider0.6%
SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube)20.8%
Checkmarx One10.3%
Other68.3%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…
Rizwan-Alam - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy automated web app scanning, but gives many false positives and isn't always stable
One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions. This is the main aspect that I hope to see Rapid7 improve on. Beyond reducing false positives, I would also like to see them implement better reporting features, particularly in the executive summary type of reports which need to be user-friendly and easily understood by non-technical people. The recommendations and solutions on these reports could always be improved to make them more relevant, too. Lastly, the stability isn't that great, and sometimes it becomes non-responsive. I feel like the stability of the application is very average and currently needs more work.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is able to detect a wide range of vulnerabilities. It's better at it than other products."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"Technical support has been good."
"The transaction recorder within WebInspect is easy to use, which is valuable for our team."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I've found the centralized dashboard the most valuable. For the management, it helps a lot to have abilities at the central level."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"What I like most about AppSpider is that it's easy to use and its automated scan gives me all the details I need to know when it comes to vulnerabilities and their solutions."
"The solution is highly stable, rated at ten out of ten."
"It is really accurate and the rate of false positives is very low."
"The most valuable feature of Rapid7 AppSpider is the vulnerability reporting data. Additionally, the data is reported in a convenient way rather than seeing them as a PDF. We are able to generate all the reports exactly what we want in a flexible way."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"The initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
"The setup is usually straightforward."
 

Cons

"Creating reports is very slow and it is something that should be improved."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"Fortify WebInspect's shortcoming stems from the fact that it is a very expensive product in Korea, which makes it difficult for its potential customers to introduce the product in their IT environment."
"The scanner could be better."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users."
"The dashboard and interface are crucial and they need some improvement."
"The solution is too slow. It could take a full day to scan. Competitors are much faster."
"Implementing Rapid7 AppSpider requires scanning and self-identification mechanisms. You can add different types of authentication to each scan."
"It needs better integration with mobile applications."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"The product needs to be able to scale for large companies, like ours. We have millions of IP addresses that need to be scanned, and the scalability is not great."
"The performance of the solution could improve. When I compare the speed it is slower than others on the market. There are some tricks we use to help speed up the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is very expensive."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."
"The price is okay."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"AppSpider is closed-source software and you need to acquire a license in order to use it."
"The price is pretty fair."
"The licensing cost depends on the number of users."
"It is expensive if you want to buy the Enterprise version that is able to scan multiple applications at once."
"The price of Rapid7 AppSpider cost 9,000 annually but there is limited usage. Large companies are able to negotiate a better price or a better deal for the usage with the vendor."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
15%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise15
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
While I am not directly involved with licensing, I can share that our project's license for 1-9 applications costs between $15,000 to $19,000. In comparison, Burp Suite costs approximately $500 to ...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
WebInspect works efficiently with Java-based or .NET based applications. However, it struggles with Salesforce applications, where it requires approximately 20-24 hours to crawl and audit but produ...
What is your primary use case for Fortify WebInspect?
I am currently working with several tools. For Fortify, I use SCA and WebInspect. Apart from that, I use Burp Suite from PortSwigger. For API testing, I use Postman with Burp Suite or WebInspect fo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rapid7 AppSpider?
The price is not high, but for Japanese customers, localization may incur additional costs.
What needs improvement with Rapid7 AppSpider?
For Japanese customers, localization is needed. The product should offer a GUI in Japanese and provide Japanese reports for end-users.
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 AppSpider?
Our clients use AppSpider to address security concerns for their websites. It is particularly used by customers who require security assessments.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
AppSpider
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aaron's
Microsoft
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs. Rapid7 AppSpider and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.