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

GitHub Advanced Security vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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
11th
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
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of GitHub Advanced Security is 2.0%, down from 6.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.5%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security3.5%
GitHub Advanced Security2.0%
Other94.5%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Devendiran Kandan - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Security scanning has protected our pipelines but currently needs clearer dashboards and controls
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 inline product, I'm not seeing user-friendly things in GitHub Advanced Security. Dependent bots and the secret detection are good compared to others. However, code scanning is not finding very good results based on pipeline where it will scan and do code scanning. While build, before building and deploying the code, we want to block or do an advanced model, but it is not supporting. During deployment, code scanning is not good. It is a little complicated. It is not a straightforward method we can complete. We need expertise to get the full benefit, and troubleshooting sometimes requires going through that. The security overview dashboard is not really clear. It's not showing centralized information; each repo is showing, but if you compare it with competitors, it is not that great. Mainly in the centralized dashboard, enterprise level needs to improve. A centralized way where we can get that overall view is needed, and we want that code scanning and blocking deployments based on security. There are AI improvements, but however, it is not so easy to configure. It is multiple windows we need to go through and make changes or configure that. A few things we need to enable going into settings, and a few things we can find out in security. One product where security means the security dashboard should cover everything, but it is going here and there in many places.
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 initial setup was straightforward and completed in a matter of minutes."
"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."
"GitHub Advanced Security is a very developer-friendly solution that is integrated within my development environment."
"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."
"The best features of GitHub Advanced Security are its flexibility and the multiple options it has compared to other tools."
"GitHub Advanced Security is ten out of ten scalable."
"GitHub Advanced Security's secret scanning is good."
"GitHub Advanced Security uses artificial intelligence in the backend, specifically CodeQL, to analyze code and provide fewer but more reliable findings, so there are less false positives."
"Fortify supports most languages. Other tools are limited to Java and other typical languages. IBM's solutions aren't flexible enough to support any language. Fortify also integrates with lots of tools because it has API support."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"This identification provides us an advantage in that the service itself works to stay abreast and knowledgeable about emerging threats."
"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."
"Because of the kind of products we deal with, and the kind of customers we have, we have really specific security requirements and practices we need to follow, specifically applying to our SDLC."
"The features I found most valuable is that it is very configurable and the installation was also very easy."
"I think the most valuable feature is its ability to address the source code scanning and dynamic scanning in a known, correlated way."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
 

Cons

"There could be DST features included in the product."
"The customizations are a little bit difficult."
"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."
"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."
"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."
"The report limitations are the main issue."
"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."
"For GitHub Advanced Security, I would like to see more support for various programming languages."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"It natively supports only a few languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved."
"Technical support is 6/10. I find the Internet to be more helpful at times than their own tech support in finding answers."
"There are many false positives identified by the solution."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"The thing that could be improved is reducing the cost of usage and including some of the most pricey features, such as dynamic analysis and that sort of functionality, which makes the difference between different types of tools."
"It would be useful if they could integrate secure design reviews, security user stories in Fortify on Demand Portal, and also look for possible options to get just one view of risks for given services (Covering Application, Infrastructure, Pen. Test, etc.)."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The current licensing model, which relies on active commitments, poses challenges, particularly in predicting and managing growth."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"We make an annual purchase of the licenses we need."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"Fortify on Demand is affordable, and its licensing comes with a year of support."
"It is cost-effective."
"There are different costs for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand depending on the assessments you want to use. There is only a standard license needed to use the solution."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

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 Business18
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

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 advice do you have for others considering GitHub Advanced Security?
Dependent bots and the secret detection are good compared to others. However, code scanning is not finding very good results based on pipeline where it will scan and do code scanning. While build, ...
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 advice do you have for others considering Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?
I use Fortify on Demand for monitoring up to a certain extent; it provides monitoring and helps analyze and identify issues that could propagate in the application. When used in conjunction with Ar...
 

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: November 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.