Armor vs. Fortify by OpenText

Armor gives you what you need to be successful regardless of technical ability. If you can maintain the systems yourself, you are definitely ahead of the game with their service. If you're not prepared to configure and maintain the systems, they do a pretty good job of getting it set up during the onboarding process so that you don't need to dig into the technical guts too much. If you find yourself in over your head, their support staff can handle it for you in most cases.

Incentivized

It is best suited for runtime application security scanning and very useful for automation. You can seemlessly integrate with pipeline for dynamic scans. Cloud based apps can also be scanned for vulnerabilities, cross site scripting attacks. Basically all OWASP TOP 10. It is less appropriate to use if you have serverless architecture

Incentivized

• Security - we have requirements met right out of the box and the implementation of new resources is done with security in mind.
• Speed - We can scale resources easy and the infrastructure is fast and efficient.
• Responsiveness - Support tickets are handled very fast with almost immediate solutions.

Incentivized

• DAST Scanning
• API Scanning
• Less detection of false positive

Incentivized

• Authentication and access against the secure messaging portal is overkill when the response I'm logging in to see merely says, "yes, we have your message. An agent will respond shortly". There should be an option to receive updates like this through email.
• The online portal that allows us to clone servers is very slow to respond. More than once I've spun up an additional server due to the lack of visual feedback on the initial request.
• The web application firewall does not seem to be sophisticated enough to differentiate between logged in administrators and end users. We use a CMS system which allows admins to create scripts. These often get barred by the WAF even though they are not malicious.

Incentivized

• Reporting could be better
• Can be an involved setup if your organization is not using common build tools
• Users get spammed with a lot of email updates from the service

Incentivized

Since every firm needs to perform static code analysis on their applications, I believe Micro Focus Fortify WebInspect would work well for them (they also offer dynamic scanning, although I haven't used it myself). Different static analysis tools scan code in different ways, and Micro Focus Fortify WebInspect asks you to submit a complete build of the application along with debugging files. Depending on how your company builds its apps, this requirement may be simple or challenging.

Incentivized

It is a cloud-based platform which can provide us a very useful and unique features like Application Assessment, Scans, Vulnerability Test, Comprehensive Reporting, Monitoring, etc. Fortify by Open Text is also outstanding in various parameters for the support and integration and it is highly adaptable in various DevOps Program where you need secure app testing with all given features.

Incentivized

Approximately 50% of all messages we receive are automated. Either that an agent will be assigned, has been assigned, or a ticket is closed. I'd like to see more 'real' interaction, and less box ticking, though I appreciate process has to be followed. That's the one point off. Everything else is very good.

Incentivized

Always receive excellent support from the vendor. No issues there.

Incentivized

Fortify Application Defender is a little more timely and upfront with a lot of their information on cyber security. we like what they provide and how they communicate with our users. I think they have a good understanding and practice in their field. they seem best suited for us and the best fit.

Incentivized

• DevSecOps helped in reducing efforts
• License cost was less
• We could roll out double the count of applications with implementation of WebInspect

Incentivized