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

Fortify on Demand vs Kiuwan comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kiuwan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
19th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
15th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Kiuwan is 1.0%, down from 1.1% 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.
Anshul Anshul - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient and accurate scanning, and detailed analysis
In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further. Another issue I've encountered is that Kiuwan only looks at the version of components and doesn't take into account any workaround fixes that have been implemented at the code level. This can result in false positives being reported. Additionally, these issues are in the "insights" tab and not in the code base security aspect. Lastly, when muting findings that are false positives, there should be an option to see the only available at the code level rather than at the organization level because it can lead to missing vulnerabilities if they are muted at the org level. An additional feature that would be helpful is the ability to easily download reports from Kiuwan. Specifically, in the "insights" tab, we have been encountering an error when trying to download the PDF report. We are able to download the code-based security report, but not the insights report. This has been an ongoing issue for the past couple of months and would be beneficial if it could be resolved. My main recommendation would be to address the issues with downloading reports that we have been experiencing. Additionally, it would be helpful if Kiuwan could support a wider range of programming languages, as there are currently some that are not compatible with the tool. If the code of a particular application falls under the category which is not compatible with Kiuwan, then it will not be able to scan it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution saves us a lot of money. We're trying to reduce exposure and costs related to remediation."
"The scanning capabilities, particularly for our repositories, have been invaluable."
"This product is top-notch solution and the technology is the best on the market."
"We have the option to test applications with or without credentials."
"I don’t know of any other On-Demand enterprise solution like this one where we can load the details and within a few days, receive the results of intrusion attacks, and work with HP Security Experts when needed for clarification"
"Each bank may have its own core banking applications with proprietary support for different programming languages. This makes Fortify particularly relevant and advantageous in those cases."
"The quality of application security testing reduces risk and gives very few false positives."
"It helps deploy and track changes easily as per time-to-time market upgrades."
"The solution has a continuous integration process."
"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."
"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."
"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."
"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."
"I have found the security and QA in the source code to be most valuable."
"The solution offers very good technical support."
"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."
 

Cons

"We have some stability issues, but they are minimal."
"The cybersecurity specialist or AppSec would need a bit of training to engage the user interface and to understand how it functions."
"The technical support is actually a problem that needs to be addressed. Since the acquisition and merger with Hewlett Packard, it has been really hard to know who the technical or salesperson to talk to."
"I would like the solution to add AI support."
"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."
"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."
"It does scanning for all virtual machines and other things, but it doesn't do the scanning for containers. It currently lacks the ability to do the scanning on containers. We're asking their product management team to expand this capability to containers."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand can improve by having more graphs. For example, to show the improvement of the level of security."
"Perhaps more languages supported."
"The QA developer and security could be improved."
"Integration of the programming tools could be improved."
"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."
"The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required."
"I would like to see additional languages supported."
"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."
"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Buying a license would be feasible for regular use. For intermittent use, the cloud-based option can be used (Fortify on Demand)."
"We used the one-time application, Security Scan Dynamic. I believe the original fee was $8,000."
"It is quite expensive. Pricing and the licensing model could be improved."
"Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but I am very happy with what they're able to provide."
"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."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"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."
"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."
"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."
"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."
"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."
"Check with your account manager."
"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."
"This solution is cheaper than other tools."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 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
9%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
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 Kiuwan?
The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is quick when processing and giving an output or generating a report.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kiuwan?
I'm not entirely sure about the price and business aspects, but I assume Checkmarx might be less expensive. I think Checkmarx might offer more affordable options, especially in its smaller business...
What needs improvement with Kiuwan?
Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran...
 

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.
DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify on Demand vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.