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

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
7.8
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (14th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th)
Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd)
 

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 4.3%, down 5.1% compared to last year.
Rapid7 InsightAppSec, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 11.8% mindshare, down 12.6% since last year.
Application Security Tools
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Steyn - PeerSpot reviewer
Source code analyzer, FPR file generation, reduction of false positives and generates compliance reports, for in-depth analysis
Not challenges with the product itself. The product is very reliable. It does have a steep learning curve. But, again, one thing that Fortify or OpenText does very well is training. There are a lot of free resources and training in the community forums, free training as well as commercial training where users can train on how to use the back-end systems and the scanning engines and how to use command-line arguments because some of the procedures or some of the tools do require a bit of a learning curve. That's the only challenge I've really seen for customers because you have to learn how to use the tool effectively. But Fortify has, in fact, improved its user interface and the way users engage the dashboards and the interfaces. It is intuitive. It's easy to understand. But in some regards, the cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions. But from the point of the reliability index and how powerful the tool is, there's no challenge there. But it's just from a learning perspective; users might need a bit more skill to use the tool. The user interface isn't that tedious. It's not that difficult to understand. When I initially learned how to use the interfaces, I was able to master it within a week and was able to use it quite effectively. So training is required. All skills are needed to learn how to use the tool. I would like to see more enhancements in the dashboards. Dashboards are available. They do need some configuration and settings. But I would like to see more business intelligence capabilities within the tool. It's not particularly a cybersecurity function, but, for instance, business impact analysis or other features where you can actually use business intelligence capabilities within your security tool. That would be remarkable because not only do you have a cybersecurity tool, but you also have a tool that can give you business impact analysis and some other measurements. A bit more intelligence in terms of that from a cybersecurity perspective would be remarkable.
Shritam Bhowmick - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"I do not remember any issues with stability."
"The solution is user-friendly. One feature I find very effective is the tool's automatic scanning capability. It scans replicas of the code developers write and automatically detects any vulnerabilities. The integration with CI/CD tools is also useful for plugins."
"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"The most valuable feature is the capacity to be able to check vulnerabilities during the development process. The development team can check whether the code they are using is vulnerable to some type of attack or there is some type of vulnerability so that they can mitigate it. It helps us in achieving a more secure approach towards internal applications. It is an intuitive solution. It gives all the information that a developer needs to remediate a vulnerability in the coding process. It also gives you some examples of how to remediate a vulnerability in different programming languages. This solution is pretty much what we were searching for."
"One of the top features is the source code review for vulnerabilities. When we look at source code, it's hard to see where areas may be weak in terms of security, and Fortify on Demand's source code review helps with that."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"The automatic automation of the automated authorization to the SCANNET environment is valuable."
"When considering DAST, it is not attributed to a singular feature but rather the capabilities of the engine that provides a genuine penetration testing experience and delivers insightful reports."
"In Rapid7 InsightAppSec, a distinctive feature is the provision of a CDM for integrating web servers and web applications. To establish the connection between these applications, you only need to paste the provided CDN into your metadata. Once connected, every piece of information, including vulnerabilities, can be accessed. It also offers demo sessions."
"The initial setup for us was easy enough. We didn't face too many issues. Deployment took maybe 30 minutes. It's quite quick and doesn't cause too much trouble at the outset."
"It uses a signature-based method to check for problems with your code and will provide an alert if anything is found."
"The product’s most valuable feature is UI. It is easy to manage and find vulnerabilities in the application."
"I would rate the technical support from Rapid7 a ten, indicating high-quality support."
"It is a very robust solution."
 

Cons

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand cannot be run from a Linux Agent. When we are coding the endpoint it will not work, we have to use Windows Agent. This is something they could improve."
"The UI could be better. Fortify should also suggest new packages in the product that can be upgraded. Currently, it shows that, but it's not visible enough. In future versions, I would like more insights about the types of vulnerabilities and the pages associated with the exact CVE."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"It's still a little bit too complex for regular developers. It takes a little bit more time than usual. I know static code scan is not the main focus of the tool, but the overall time span to scan the code, and even to set up the code scanning, is a bit overwhelming for regular developers."
"The vulnerability analysis does not always provide guidelines for what the developer should do in order to correct the problem, which means that the code has to be manually inspected and understood."
"It lacks of some important features that the competitors have, such as Software Composition Analysis, full dead code detection, and Agile Alliance's Best Practices and Technical Debt."
"New technologies and DevOps could be improved. Fortify on Demand can be slow (slower than other vendors) to support new technologies or new software versions."
"During development, when our developer makes changes to their code, they typically use GitHub or GitLab to track those changes. However, proper integration between Fortify on Demand and GitHub and GitLab is not there yet. Improved integration would be very valuable to us."
"I required a solution to manage on-premises, but I was not as satisfied as expected."
"Currently, InsightAppSec lacks similar functionality. Customers must wait for remediation during the developers' preparation of a new version."
"The reporting feature of Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement as it currently provides basic reports."
"There is room for improvement in the response time of customer service and support levels."
"The dynamic scanning feature has simplified and improved the security testing process. I suggest adding a SaaS feature to the solution to support scanning SaaS applications, making it more comprehensive. It would be beneficial if the solution could also scan mobile applications. It only scans web applications and should also cover mobile applications, including firmware recommendations."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement in detecting phishing pages."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"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'd rate it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"If I exceed one million lines of code, there might be an extra cost or a change in the pricing bracket."
"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."
"The solution is expensive and the price could be reduced."
"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."
"We are still using the trial version at this point but I can already see from the trial version alone that it is a good product. For others, I would say that Fortify on Demand might look expensive at the beginning, but it is very powerful and so you shouldn't be put off by the price."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"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."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
862,624 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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?
There are frequent complaints about false positives from Fortify. One day it may pass a scan with no issues, and the next day, without any code changes, it will report vulnerabilities such as passw...
What do you like most about Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
In Rapid7 InsightAppSec, a distinctive feature is the provision of a CDM for integrating web servers and web applications. To establish the connection between these applications, you only need to p...
What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
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...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
Our main use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec is to perform internal assessment of applications and external facing applications. We have a cloud engine plus on-premises engine, and we have been lever...
 

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 OpenText Core Application Security vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
862,624 professionals have used our research since 2012.