GitHub Code Scanning vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

GitHub and OpenText are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. GitHub is ranked #17 with an average rating of 8.0, while OpenText is ranked #9 with an average rating of 7.8. GitHub holds a 1.2% mindshare in SAST, compared to OpenText’s 3.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of GitHub users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

GitHub Code Scanning

Read 6 GitHub Code Scanning reviews

2,386 Views
2,291 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

10,911 Views
7,747 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

GitHub Code Scanning

OpenText Core Application S...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

OpenText Core Application Security and GitHub Code Scanning are competing products in the domain of application security. While OpenText offers more favorable pricing and support, GitHub Code Scanning stands out with its comprehensive feature set, justifying its higher cost.

Features: OpenText Core Application Security provides robust vulnerability scanning, integration with multiple development tools, and comprehensive security management. GitHub Code Scanning excels in automated code analysis, direct GitHub workflow integration, and enhancing developer productivity with streamlined code-level security.

Room for Improvement: OpenText could enhance its feature set and improve integration options to make it more competitive with larger ecosystems. It also needs addressing scalability issues for larger organizations. GitHub Code Scanning could improve pricing structures for smaller teams and provide more customization options. Enhancing documentation for complex integrations could also be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Core Application Security's flexible deployment model ensures compatibility with diverse environments, while their proactive customer service is highly regarded. GitHub Code Scanning offers simplicity in deployment due to direct repository integration, supported by a vast community that simplifies troubleshooting and support access.

Pricing and ROI: OpenText Core Application Security is known for competitive pricing and attractive ROI, as its cloud-based options lower upfront costs. GitHub Code Scanning generally requires a higher initial investment, reflecting its richer feature offerings and deep integration, which provide significant returns through enhanced productivity and security capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed GitHub Code Scanning vs. OpenText Core Application Security Report (Updated: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning vs. OpenText Core Application Security

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 908,800 peers since 2012

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 Code Scanning

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

17th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Core Application S...

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

9th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of GitHub Code Scanning is 1.2%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Core Application Security is 3.2%, down from 4.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.2%
GitHub Code Scanning	1.2%
Other	95.6%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

AbhishekKumar20

Software Development Manager at Amazon

Code scanning identifies vulnerabilities quickly and improves team response with minimal setup

I have been using Git for approximately 13-14 years. I have used GitHub Code Scanning for about three to four years. The primary purpose is to identify any vulnerability in the code itself. The system logs vulnerabilities that we can immediately examine to see all the error-prone areas. The AI functionalities include predefined agents that scan through and immediately provide responses regarding the best nomenclature or code coverage percentage. It's actually a one-time setup, and the team benefits as long as they push code and changes in the repository itself. Every time we push something, we immediately check the total deviation, whether our code coverage has improved, or if any vulnerability has been identified. There is always a metrics dashboard that we can see and identify. Primarily, GitHub is used for doing the versioning itself in the repository. With vulnerability functionality being provided and AI agents available, it makes a complete package. As soon as we publish our code, we immediately get to know the test code coverage. This immediately informs us about all the vulnerable areas which are not being fully tested. If we address those areas, most vulnerabilities are resolved. Even after tests are added, if by any chance the test is not treated cleanly or corner cases are missed, GitHub Code Scanning immediately flags those corners. It's always beneficial to have because it's not humanly possible to check all corner case scenarios, but as a system where they diagnose each line item, that's very helpful.

Read full review

Himanshu_Tyagi

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"GitHub Code Scanning has positively impacted my organization as it helps us recognize errors and avoid many later issues which may arise."

"It's very scalable, very easy to handle, and very intuitive."

"We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management."

"GitHub Code Spaces brings significant value with its simplicity and ease of use."

"The solution helps identify vulnerabilities by understanding how ports communicate with applications running on a system. Ports are like house numbers; to visit someone's house, you must know their number. Similarly, ports are used to communicate with applications. For example, if you want to use an HTTP web server, you must use port 80. It is the port on which the web application or your server listens for incoming requests."

"The static code analysis capability in GitHub Code Scanning is a very powerful feature, providing the ability to identify vulnerabilities and ensure code quality."

"The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."

"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."

"The user interface is good."

"The most valuable features of Micro Focus Fortify on Demand have been SAT analysis and application security."

"The process was easy to follow and we were supported 24/7 by TAM personnel to help with any fire drills, which was helpful many times when I needed a quick answer late at night or early in the morning."

"I would definitely recommend Micro Focus Fortify any day for clients who are looking for a good security solution."

"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."

"Once we have our project created with our application pipeline connected to the test scanning, it only takes two minutes. The report explaining what needs to be modified related to security and vulnerabilities in our code is very helpful. We are able to do static and dynamic code scanning."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"In my opinion, areas of GitHub Code Scanning that could be improved include that a few things are not visible to us, such as where it stores data and which path."

"GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates."

"One area for improvement could be the ability to have an AI system digest the reports generated from code scanning and provide a summary. Currently, the reports can be extensive, and users may overlook details, such as outdated libraries, which could be highlighted for attention."

"At times it becomes very annoying as it highlights certain things which are intuitive. They require code coverage for those aspects as an extra overhead."

"When running code scans, GitHub Code Scanning provides recommendations for probable fixes. However, integrating a feature where developers receive real-time highlights of vulnerabilities when checking in or merging a PR would be beneficial."

"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."

"The Visual Studio plugin seems to hang when a scan is run on big projects. I would expect some improvements there."

"We typically do our bulk uploads of our scans with some automation at the end of the development cycle but the scanning can take a lot of time. If you were doing all of it at regular intervals it would still consume a lot of time. This could procedure could improve."

"Not fully integrated with CIT processes."

"There is room for improvement in the integration process."

"We would like a reduction in the time frame of scans. It takes us three to five days to run a scan now. We would like that reduced to under three days."

"I would like the solution to add AI support."

"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"GitHub Code Scanning is a moderately priced solution."

"The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month."

"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."

"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."

"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."

"The product's cost depends on the type of license."

"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."

"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."

"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."

"It is not more expensive than other solutions, but the pricing is competitive."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Construction Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Construction Company

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	46

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub Code Scanning?

The organization pays for the license of GitHub Code Scanning, but specific price details are unknown.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitHub Code Scanning?

In my opinion, areas of GitHub Code Scanning that could be improved include that a few things are not visible to us, such as where it stores data and which path. There is a separate team for that w...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering GitHub Code Scanning?

I am an end user only here with GitHub Code Scanning. I currently might be using the latest version of GitHub Code Scanning, but I don't remember the specific version. I have not utilized the real-...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 16% of the time

Coverity Static vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 10% of the time

Aikido Security vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 6% of the time

Fortify Software Security Center vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 5% of the time

Veracode vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 5% of the time

More GitHub Code Scanning Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 25% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 6% of the time

GitHub vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning

July 2026

Download GitHub Code Scanning product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

July 2026

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

No data available

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

Code scanning is a feature that you use to analyze the code in a GitHub repository to find security vulnerabilities and coding errors. Any problems identified by the analysis are shown in GitHub.

GitHub

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning vs. OpenText Core Application Security

August 2026

Free Report: GitHub Code Scanning vs. OpenText Core Application Security

Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Code Scanning vs. OpenText Core Application Security and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GitHub Code Scanning vs. OpenText Core Application Security report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.