Defensics Protocol Fuzzing vs OpenText Core Application Security comparison

The compared Black Duck and OpenText solutions aren't in the same category. Black Duck is ranked #4 in FTT , and holds a 18.2% mindshare in the category. OpenText is ranked #11 in AS , with an average rating of 7.8, and holds a 3.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Read 4 Defensics Protocol Fuzzing reviews

1,405 Views
155 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Core Application S...

Read 64 OpenText Core Application Security reviews

7,385 Views
5,465 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

OpenText Core Application S...

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

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Fuzz Testing Tools (4th)

OpenText Core Application S...

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (11th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (8th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Defensics Protocol Fuzzing is designed for Fuzz Testing Tools and holds a mindshare of 18.2%, down 23.1% compared to last year.
OpenText Core Application Security, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 3.1% mindshare, down 4.4% since last year.

Fuzz Testing Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Defensics Protocol Fuzzing	18.2%
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional	33.0%
GitLab	26.7%
Other	22.099999999999994%

Fuzz Testing Tools

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Core Application Security	3.1%
SonarQube	14.5%
Checkmarx One	9.2%
Other	73.2%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Sarath Kumar Choday

Senior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies

Product security tests for switches and router sections

Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install. What I see in the documentation isn't that. Even if something doesn't malfunction, sometimes it is hard to install and execute. The product needs video documentation. This would help a lot more.

Read full review

Himanshu_Tyagi

Lead Cybersecurity at TBO

Supports secure development pipelines and improves issue detection but limits internal visibility and needs broader dashboard integration

If you have an internal team and you want your internal team to validate false positives, basically to determine whether it's a valid issue or an invalid issue, then I wouldn't recommend it much. That was the only reason we migrated from Fortify on Demand to another solution. Fortify has another tool which is Fortify WebInspect. On Demand is the outsourcing solution, and WebInspect you can use with your in-house team, which is basically the product developed by the Fortify team. For automated scanning, Fortify helps a lot. Regarding the visibility for the internal team, everyone is moving toward the DevSecOps side, and Fortify team has made good progress that you can integrate into your CICD pipeline. One thing I would highlight is if Fortify can focus more on the centralized dashboard of the tools because nowadays, tools such as SentinelOne also exist for identifying security issues, but they have a centralized dashboard that merges their cloud solution and application security side solution together. If you have one tool that works for different solutions, it helps a lot. They are doing good, but they should invest more on the AI side as well because AI security is evolving these days. On the cloud side, they have already made good progress, but I believe they should explore the new area related to AI security as well.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent; it will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure, and because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

"ROI was 100%. Since there are no product suites available that provide the level of testing available with Codenomicon, the development, quality and security assurance departments know that the investment was correct."

"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."

"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."

"The stability of this product is great; we tested it under multiple constraints and even on cloud services it is absolutely stable."

"Simple and straightforward GUI."

"When choosing a software security product, we expect the product not only has the ability to find exploits, but also has educational and instructional capabilities related to exploits."

"If somebody wants to shift left or integrate security early on in the CI/CD pipeline from a DevOps standpoint, this is probably one of the best tools available."

"The process was easy to follow and we were supported 24/7 by TAM personnel to help with any fire drills, which was helpful many times when I needed a quick answer late at night or early in the morning."

"The solution is user-friendly."

"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."

"The licensing was good."

"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."

"Fortify on Demand has helped us more easily ensure the security of our client's application, which works with sensitive information such as payments and taxation."

More OpenText Core Application Security pros

Cons

"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."

"You can't implement proprietary ciphering algorithms, nor can you modify protocol models if you need to test customized public protocols."

"It requires understanding the Defensics protocol."

"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."

"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."

"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."

"If you're a beginner, give Fortify a go. If you're a professional, it might be worth looking at other tools because Fortify does have limitations when it comes to scalability and executable codes."

"The products must provide better integration with build tools."

"It could have a little bit more streamlined installation procedure. Based on the things that I've done, it could also be a bit more automated. It is kind of taking a bunch of different scanners, and SSC is just kind of managing the results. The scanning doesn't really seem to be fully integrated into the SSC platform. More automation and any kind of integration in the SSC platform would definitely be good. There could be a way to initiate scans from SSC and more functionality on the server-side to initiate desk scans if it is not already available."

"This solution would be improved if the code-quality perspective were added to it, on top of the security aspect."

"However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved."

"Reporting could be improved."

More OpenText Core Application Security cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is a bit expensive."

"Fortify on Demand is more expensive than Burpsuite. I rate its pricing a nine out of ten."

"Fortify on Demand is moderately priced, but its pricing could be more flexible."

"I believe the rental license is not too expensive, but it provides a lot of information about the vulnerabilities."

"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand licenses are managed by our IT team and the license model is user-based."

"The pricing model it's based on how many applications you wish to scan."

"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 is fair compared to that of other solutions."

"The solution is a little expensive."

More OpenText Core Application Security pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fuzz Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

887,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Government

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	18
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	45

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

Areas for improvement should be contextualized post the OpenText acquisition, but back when I was working with Micro Focus, they focused heavily on enterprise-centric solutions. Now, after the acqu...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Fortify on Demand?

For OpenText Core Application Security, I currently support a couple of my clients who are using Fortify on Demand for their web application, CRM, and sales platform. Many good features of Fortify ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Blue Cedar vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 6% of the time

Coverity Static vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 6% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing

Compared 6% of the time

More Defensics Protocol Fuzzing Competitors

SonarQube vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 18% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 5% of the time

Coverity Static vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

HCL AppScan vs OpenText Core Application Security

Compared 4% of the time

More OpenText Core Application Security Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Defensics Protocol Fuzzing vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

April 2026

Download Defensics Protocol Fuzzing product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Core Application Security

April 2026

OpenText Core Application Security report

Download OpenText Core Application Security product report

Also Known As

Codenomicon Defensics

Micro Focus Fortify on Demand

Overview

Defensics® fuzz testing is a comprehensive, powerful, and automated black box solution that enables organizations to effectively and efficiently discover and remediate security weaknesses in software. By taking a systematic and intelligent approach to negative testing, Defensics allows organizations to ensure software security without compromising on product innovation, increasing time to market, or inflating operational costs.

Black Duck

OpenText Core Application Security offers robust features like static and dynamic scanning, real-time vulnerability tracking, and seamless integration with development platforms, designed to enhance code security and reduce operational costs.

OpenText Core Application Security is a cloud-based, on-demand service providing accurate and deep scanning capabilities with detailed reporting. Its integrations with development platforms ensure an enhanced security layer in the development lifecycle, benefiting users by lowering operational costs and facilitating efficient remediation. The platform addresses needs for intuitive interfaces, API support, and comprehensive vulnerability assessments, helping improve code security and accelerate time-to-market. Despite its strengths, challenges exist around false positives, report clarity, and language support, alongside confusing pricing and package options. Enhancements are sought in areas like CI/CD pipeline configuration, report visualization, scan times, and integration with third-party tools such as GitLab, container scanning, and software composition analysis.

What features define OpenText Core Application Security?

Static and Dynamic Scanning: Offers thorough analysis to identify vulnerabilities during development.
Real-time Vulnerability Tracking: Continuously updates and monitors potential security threats.
Seamless Development Platform Integration: Enhances security processes without disrupting workflows.
Cloud-Based Service: Provides flexible, on-demand security capabilities with accurate results.
API Support: Allows smooth integration and automation within existing systems.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Reduced Operational Costs: Optimizes resources by lowering costs associated with security management.
Efficient Remediation: Speeds up the process of identifying and resolving vulnerabilities.
Enhanced Code Security: Strengthens overall application security during the development lifecycle.
Accelerated Time-to-Market: Streamlines development stages by integrating essential security tools.

Industries like mobile applications, e-commerce, and banking leverage OpenText Core Application Security for its ability to identify vulnerabilities such as SQL injections. Integrating seamlessly with DevSecOps and security auditing processes, this tool supports developers in writing safer code, ensuring secure application deployment and enhancing software assurance.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks

SAP, Aaron's, British Gas, FICO, Cox Automative, Callcredit Information Group, Vital and more.

We monitor all Fuzz Testing 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.