GitHub Code Scanning vs HCL AppScan comparison

GitHub and HCLSoftware are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. GitHub is ranked #20 with an average rating of 9.5, while HCLSoftware is ranked #12 with an average rating of 7.9. GitHub holds a 0.8% mindshare in SAST, compared to HCLSoftware ’s 2.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of GitHub users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of HCLSoftware users who would recommend it.

GitHub Code Scanning

Read 2 GitHub Code Scanning reviews

534 Views
473 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

HCL AppScan

Read 43 HCL AppScan reviews

4,189 Views
3,208 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

GitHub Code Scanning

HCL AppScan

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 12, 2024

HCL AppScan and GitHub Code Scanning compete in security scanning software. GitHub Code Scanning is preferred for integration features, while HCL AppScan wins on pricing and support.

Features: HCL AppScan offers robust scanning capabilities, comprehensive policy configuration, and great pricing. GitHub Code Scanning is known for deep integration with GitHub workflows, actionable insights, and adaptability within development pipelines.

Room for Improvement: HCL AppScan could enhance integration flexibility, user experience, and database reach. GitHub Code Scanning could benefit from comprehensive vulnerability databases, better reporting features, and improved support response.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: HCL AppScan is praised for reliable customer support but has an intricate deployment process. GitHub Code Scanning simplifies setup with smooth GitHub integration and offers ease of deployment, but with mixed reviews on support responsiveness.

Pricing and ROI: HCL AppScan is valued for affordability and strong ROI from scanning capabilities relative to cost. GitHub Code Scanning involves higher setup costs but demonstrates good ROI through enhanced integration and streamlined development processes.

To learn more, read our detailed GitHub Code Scanning vs. HCL AppScan Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning vs. HCL AppScan

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,533 peers since 2012

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

GitHub Code Scanning

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

20th

Average Rating

9.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

HCL AppScan

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

12th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (15th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of GitHub Code Scanning is 0.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL AppScan is 2.8%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

VishalSingh

Consulting & Solutions, BA/BD in Enterprise IT on Open Source, Red Hat & EDB at KEEN AND ABLE COMPUTERS PVT LTD

Traverses the entire network, scanning every system to determine which ports are open

You can use the tool locally on your system or in the cloud. I rate it a nine out of ten. It's a very good tool for people who want to start using GitHubCode Scanning, especially for software development or team collaboration. GitHubCode Scanning allows teams to collaborate by uploading files to repositories. For example, if someone is developing an application, they can host the code on GitHub Code Scanning. Other developers can then download the code for testing purposes. If bugs are found, fixes can be applied using the GitHub Code Scanningrepository, and everyone on the team can see the changes. Software developers often use GitHub Code Scanning for version control, and it's essential for CI/CD pipelines to work.

Read full review

Rishi Anupam

Senior Manager at Airtel

A stable and scalable scanning solution with good reporting feature

The solution is used for the vulnerabilities scan on the network side The reporting part is the most valuable feature. The penetration testing feature should be included. I have been using the solution for four years. It is a stable solution. I rate it seven out of ten. It is a scalable…

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

"We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management."

"The solution helps identify vulnerabilities by understanding how ports communicate with applications running on a system. Ports are like house numbers; to visit someone's house, you must know their number. Similarly, ports are used to communicate with applications. For example, if you want to use an HTTP web server, you must use port 80. It is the port on which the web application or your server listens for incoming requests."

"It is easy it is to use. It is quick to find things, because of the code scanning tools. It's quite simple to use and it is very good the way it reports the findings."

"This is a stable solution."

"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."

"It identifies all the URLs and domains on its own and then performs tests and provides the results."

"I like the recording feature."

"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the scanning or security part."

"AppScan's most valuable features include its ability to identify vulnerabilities accurately, provide detailed remediation steps, and the newly introduced AI-powered features that enhance its functionality further."

More HCL AppScan pros

Cons

"GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates."

"There is not a central management for static and dynamic."

"I would love to see more containers. Many of the tools are great, they require an amount of configuration, setup and infrastructure. If most the applications were in a container, I think everything would be a little bit faster, because all our clients are now using containers."

"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."

"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."

"They could add a software component analysis tool."

"They should have a better UI for dashboards."

"A desktop version should be added."

"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."

More HCL AppScan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month."

"GitHub Code Scanning is a moderately priced solution."

"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."

"The price of HCL AppScan is okay, in my opinion. You just buy HCL AppScan and don't pay anything anymore, meaning it is just a one-time purchase."

"The solution is moderately priced."

"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."

"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."

"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."

"The tool was expensive."

"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."

More HCL AppScan pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Government

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitHub Code Scanning?

We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub Code Scanning?

The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitHub Code Scanning?

GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates.

See all answers

What do you like most about HCL AppScan?

The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.

See all answers

What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?

AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives. It also requires enhancements in customer support, similar to what Veracode provides. Regularly scheduling calls with clients to discuss fe...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?

The primary use case for AppScan is for security purposes. I compare AppScan with other tools such as Veracode. We use AppScan for vulnerability detection and auto-remediation of vulnerabilities wi...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 30% of the time

Coverity vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 28% of the time

SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 19% of the time

Aikido Security vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 7% of the time

Veracode vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 3% of the time

More GitHub Code Scanning Competitors

Acunetix vs HCL AppScan

Compared 15% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs HCL AppScan

Compared 12% of the time

Veracode vs HCL AppScan

Compared 10% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

OWASP Zap vs HCL AppScan

Compared 8% of the time

More HCL AppScan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

February 2025

Download GitHub Code Scanning product report

Buyer's Guide

HCL AppScan

February 2025

Download HCL AppScan product report

Also Known As

No data available

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan

Overview

Code scanning is a feature that you use to analyze the code in a GitHub repository to find security vulnerabilities and coding errors. Any problems identified by the analysis are shown in GitHub.

GitHub

IBM Security AppScan enhances web application security and mobile application security, improves application security program management and strengthens regulatory compliance. By scanning your web and mobile applications prior to deployment, AppScan enables you to identify security vulnerabilities and generate reports and fix recommendations.

HCLSoftware

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning vs. HCL AppScan

January 2025

Free Report: GitHub Code Scanning vs. HCL AppScan

Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Code Scanning vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GitHub Code Scanning vs. HCL AppScan report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.