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

Fortify on Demand vs GitHub comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

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

Fortify on Demand
Ranking in Application Security Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (8th)
GitHub
Ranking in Application Security Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Version Control (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Fortify on Demand is 4.9%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub is 0.8%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

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.
Pervez Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Very good for collaboration on software projects
We use GitHub for code repository alongside Bitbucket GitHub is very good for collaboration on software projects. We prefer Bitbucket for commercial use, while GitHub is used for open source. You can get the differences, history of changes, and version control for various pull requests. You can…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is an extremely robust, scalable, and stable solution."
"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"The most valuable features are the server, scanning, and it has helped identify issues with the security analysis."
"The installation was easy."
"It is a very easy tool for developers to use in parallel while they're doing the coding. It does auto scanning as we are progressing with the CI/CD pipeline. It has got very simple and efficient API support."
"The source code analyzer is the most effective for identifying security vulnerabilities."
"While using Micro Focus Fortify on Demand we have been very happy with the results and findings."
"You can get the differences, history of changes, and version control for various pull requests."
"The solution can scale."
"The best feature is the ability to track the history of all code changes, and it's easy to use. Additionally, as it's open source, anyone can use that feature resulting in distributed development. This opens the door to collaboration with different code and developer, feature, and master branches of development."
"I'm able to access any repository that I like, whether it's public or private."
"The versioning of the code and the tracking of changes are definitely some of my top features."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the version control field."
"The tool is valuable because it helps us work in a distributed environment with multiple people across different locations and time zones. We have a common repository that everyone works on, which would be tough to manage manually. GitHub helps us maintain this single source of truth. Everyone can check out their own branches, which is important for our branching strategies. We can fork, check out feature branches, work on our code, and merge back into parent branches for deployment. This is crucial when multiple people are working on the same codebase."
"The support team is good."
 

Cons

"We want a user-based control and role-based access for developers. We want to give limited access to developers so that it only pertains to the code that they write and scanning of the codes for any vulnerabilities as they're progressing with writing the code. As of now, the interface to give restricted access to the developers is not the best. It gives them more access than what is basically required, but we don't want over-provisioning and over-access."
"The reporting capabilities need improvement, as there are some features that we would like to have but are not available at the moment."
"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."
"I would like to see improvement in CI integration and integration with GitLab or Jenkins. It needs to be more simple."
"Reporting could be improved."
"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."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"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."
"Could be more user friendly."
"The GitHub repository needs an upgraded user interface and overall UI improvements."
"GitHub could automate the setup process more, such as creating YAML files for GitHub Actions."
"It would be useful to have tutorial videos within the GitHub dashboard."
"I cannot recall coming across any shortcomings of the product."
"There is nothing that I find that needs improvement in GitHub."
"The stability can be improved."
"The query function in GitHub is a bit stiff."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"The subscription model, on a per-scan basis, is a bit expensive. That's another reason we are not using it for all the apps."
"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."
"The licensing was good because the licenses have the heavy centralized server."
"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."
"The product's cost depends on the type of license."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"It is open-source. There is no license for GitHub."
"There are no licensing fees for the features that we use."
"I use the free version of GitHub."
"The private repositories are free, which is very good."
"GitHub is an open-source application. It's free to use."
"We pay a subscription-based yearly licensing fee for the solution."
"I use the free version of the tool."
"If there are only 10 people using a particular repository, then GitHub is free. But if we increase the number of users, we need to pay the normal charge for GitHub."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
6%
 

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?
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...
What do you like most about GitHub?
The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub?
I'm not aware of the costs associated with GitHub. I simply appreciate its efficiency in managing code and collaborating with team members.
What needs improvement with GitHub?
I would like to see some AI functionality included in GitHub, similar to the features seen in GitLab, to enhance productivity. Additionally, offering limited free access to features like Copilot co...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.
Dominion Enterprises, NASA, Braintree, SAP, CyberAgent
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify on Demand vs. GitHub and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.