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

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

GitHub Advanced Security
Ranking in Application Security Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Core Application S...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitHub Advanced Security is 4.3%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
GitHub Advanced Security4.3%
OpenText Core Application Security3.2%
Other92.5%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Sabna Sainudeen - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, Application Security at Carlsberg
Seamlessly integrates into developer environment for streamlined code scanning
GitHub Advanced Security should look into API security issues, which they currently do not. Additionally, open-source security vulnerabilities are not getting updated in a timely manner. There are features in GitHub Advanced Security that cannot be used within Microsoft, which is strange since they are the same company. It should also focus on developing a software bill of materials (SBOM) to see all open software used in one place.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."
"GitHub Advanced Security is a very developer-friendly solution that is integrated within my development environment."
"GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need."
"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."
"The initial setup was straightforward and completed in a matter of minutes."
"GitHub Advanced Security's secret scanning is good."
"GitHub Advanced Security is ten out of ten scalable."
"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"Its ability to perform different types of scans, keep everything in one place, and track the triage process in Fortify SSC stands out."
"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."
"Fortify on Demand's best feature is that there's no need to install and configure it locally since it's on the cloud."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"The user interface is good."
"I do not remember any issues with stability."
 

Cons

"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."
"Open-source security vulnerabilities are not getting updated in a timely manner."
"For GitHub Advanced Security, I would like to see more support for various programming languages."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"We used additional third-party solutions, but we replaced them with GitHub Advanced Security, even though I do not have a very good opinion about GitHub Advanced Security."
"An area of GitHub Advanced Security that has room for improvement is customization."
"The reporting feature might need improvement. While it integrates seamlessly with my workflow, it doesn't provide management with oversight, such as statistics and the number of vulnerabilities."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"Takes up a lot of resources which can slow things down."
"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."
"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."
"It could have a little bit more streamlined installation procedure. Based on the things that I've done, it could also be a bit more automated. It is kind of taking a bunch of different scanners, and SSC is just kind of managing the results. The scanning doesn't really seem to be fully integrated into the SSC platform. More automation and any kind of integration in the SSC platform would definitely be good. There could be a way to initiate scans from SSC and more functionality on the server-side to initiate desk scans if it is not already available."
"The solution has some issues with latency. Sometimes it takes a while to respond. This issue should be addressed."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The current licensing model, which relies on active commitments, poses challenges, particularly in predicting and managing growth."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"It is cost-effective."
"It's a yearly contract, but I don't remember the dollar amount."
"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."
"The price is fair compared to that of other solutions."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"Despite being on the higher end in terms of cost, the biggest value lies in its abilities, including robust features, seamless integration, and high-quality findings."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise44
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitHub Advanced Security?
It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part.
What needs improvement with GitHub Advanced Security?
We used additional third-party solutions, but we replaced them with GitHub Advanced Security, even though I do not have a very good opinion about GitHub Advanced Security. Even though it is an inli...
What is your primary use case for GitHub Advanced Security?
I'm working with software development nowadays. As a process, we are using the dependent bot alerts and the code scanning for Java, and some of the code scanning is happening. Security secrets in c...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades.
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?
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. T...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Advanced Security vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.