We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and Fortinet FortiWeb based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"It has all the features we need."
"The value you can get out of the speedy production may be worth the price tag."
"The main benefit to using this solution is that we find vulnerabilities in our software before the development cycle is complete."
"The most valuable feature is the simple user interface."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"We were using HPE Security Fortify to scan code for security vulnerabilities, but it can scan only after a successful compile. If the code has dependencies or build errors, the scan fails. With Checkmarx, pre-compile scanning is seamless. This allows us to scan more code."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"L-7 protection makes possible to protect legacy/not up-to-date servers/applications without changing the application code."
"The most valuable feature is that this product represents a whole solution, including a WAF, and even anti-defacements."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"The WAF profiles has been effective at mitigating web-based threats."
"FortiWeb offers machine learning in the latest product. This fixed many problems. There are no false negatives."
"Fortinet is a great SD-WAN player when it comes to security capabilities."
"The solution is stable."
"FortiWeb's ease of deployment is what we liked the most about it. Implementing FortiWeb was extremely fast and easy, which was a significant advantage. It comes with several preconfigured rule sets and templates."
"Licensing models and Swift language support are the aspects in which this product needs to improve. Swift is a new language, in which major customers require support for lower prices."
"Integration into the SDLC (i.e. support for last version of SonarQube) could be added."
"The tool is currently quite static in terms of finding security vulnerabilities. It would be great if it was more dynamic and we had even more tools at our disposal to keep us safe. It would help if there was more scanning or if the process was more automated."
"I really would like to integrate it as a service along with the SAP HANA Cloud Platform. It will then be easy to use it directly as a service."
"One area for improvement in Checkmarx is pricing, as it's more expensive than other products."
"I think the CxAudit tool has room for improvement. At the beginning you can choose a scan of a project, but in any event the project must be scanned again (wasting time)."
"I would like to see the rate of false positives reduced."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"New releases and old releases have some bugs, some features do not work as good as we want but every new release the Fortinet team fixes up problems."
"The initial setup in our data center was somewhat complex."
"Their support needs improvement."
"Integration and learning about attacks. I would improve these areas by making FortiWeb integrate with other network technologies and feedback from multiple platforms."
"Describing security rules should be improved. It's tricky to define new feature tools when you want to describe an attack pattern and want to block it."
"Centralized management of multiple devices, and GUI improvement, could reduce the learning curve."
"Fortinet WAF came out recently, and there is not much feedback about customer experience. For each project, customers ask about the scenarios and references of the customers who have implemented this solution, which we don't have. They need to simplify the customer experience and provide more information so that we can propose Fortinet Fortiweb as a WAF solution to customers and convince them. They need to improve their service and training. We need good training to implement and use it properly and know more about it. We still don't know much about Fortinet WAF. We didn't get any proper training sessions. Other vendors like Cisco, Palo Alto, Check Point, and Barracuda provide such sessions. Whenever we receive a request from a customer for this solution, we just give the price. We don't propose this solution because we don't know much about it. We propose whatever we are familiar with and what is supported."
"FortiGate could be improved on the security end because we've had some incidents with the customer. Otherwise, there is no problem."
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Imperva Web Application Firewall. See our Checkmarx One vs. Fortinet FortiWeb report.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
