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

Fortify WebInspect vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 WebInspect
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (2nd), DevSecOps (7th)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Lifecycle Management solutions, they serve different purposes. Fortify WebInspect is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 23.9%, down 32.6% compared to last year.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 2.0% mindshare, up 2.0% since last year.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…
Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"The solution is easy to use."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"The solution's technical support was very helpful."
"It's a well-known platform for doing dynamic application scanning."
"When we are integrating it with SSC, we're able to scan and trace and see all of the vulnerabilities. Comparison is easy in SSC."
"Technical support has been good."
"It is a time-saver application."
"It offers flexibility, macros, and features to reduce the effort required for authenticated sessions."
"The Repeater and the BApp extensions are particularly useful. Certain extensions, such as the Active Scan extensions and the Autoracer extension, are very good."
"The product has a good learning hub."
"You can download different plugins if you don't have them in the standard edition."
"The extension that it provides with the community version for the skills mapping is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is the application security. It also has a reasonable price."
"Once I capture the proxy, I'm able to transfer across. All the requested information is there. I can send across the request to what we call a repeater, where I get to ready the payload that I send to the application. Put in malicious content and then see if it's responding to it."
 

Cons

"We have often encountered scanning errors."
"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"I'm not sure licensing, but on the pricing, it's a bit costly. It's a bit overpriced. Though it is an enterprise tool, there are other tools also with similar functionalities."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker."
"It requires improvement in terms of scanning. The application scan heavily utilizes the resources of an on-premise server. 32 GB RAM is very high for an enterprise web application."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"The reporting needs to be improved; it is very bad."
"One thing that is not up to the mark in PortSwigger is web application testing. I found some issues with its performance and reporting. They should work on these and give us a better outcome."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"There could be an improvement in the API security testing. There is another tool called Postman and if we had a built-in portal similar to Postman which captures the API, we would be able to generate the API traffic. Right now we need a Postman tool and the Burp Suite for performing API tests. It would be a huge benefit to be able to do it in a single UI."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional could improve the static code review."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional can improve by having more features in the free version for beginners to try."
"Scanning APIs using PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional takes a lot of time."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The price is okay."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"This solution is very expensive."
"It's a lower priced tool that we can rely on with good standard mechanisms."
"The price for the solution is expensive and could be cheaper. We pay an annual license and our team has several of them."
"We have one license. The price is very nominal."
"At $400 or $500 per license paid annually, it is a very cheap tool."
"Our licensing cost is approximately $400 USD per year."
"There is no setup cost and the cost of licensing is affordable."
"For a country such as Sri Lanka, the pricing is not reasonable."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Fortify WebInspect?
The solution's technical support was very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
Fortify WebInspect can be a bit expensive. However, considering its stability and reliability in meeting current standards, the cost is justified. Still, making the cost more affordable for multipl...
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
I would like WebInspect's scanning capability to be quicker. Specifically, being able to scan a particular flow or part of an application more rapidly would be beneficial. Additionally, the cost of...
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
Burp
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aaron's
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortify WebInspect vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.