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

HCL AppScan vs Seeker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

HCL AppScan
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (13th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (12th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
Seeker
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (12th), Mobile Threat Defense (6th), API Security (11th)
 

Featured Reviews

Gladwin Christian - PeerSpot reviewer
A useful tool to scan applications that can be easily installed
Given that we have been using HCL AppScan for many years, I think the setup process is not difficult at all. Sometimes, some issues stop or prevent my company from moving forward with the product's setup phase. We have to call HCL's support team and engage in long discussions to smoothly carry out the setup phase. In general, the product's setup phase is not difficult in our company. The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. The licenses for the solution are available only on cloud deployments nowadays. The solution is already installed in our environment. Every time a new release or software comes out from HCL, our company does a scan, which takes maybe a day or two.
San K - PeerSpot reviewer
More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need. The purposes for which applications are designed may differ in practice in the industry, and because of this, there will always be tools that sometimes report false positives. Thus, there should be some means with which I can customize the way that Seeker learns about our applications, possibly by using some kind of AI / ML capability within the tool that will automatically reduce the number of false positives that we get as we use the tool over time. Obviously, when we first start using the scanning tool there will be false positives, but as it keeps going and as I keep using the tool, there should be a period of time where either the application can learn how to ignore false positives, or I can customize it do so. Adding this type of functionality would definitely prevent future issues when it comes to reporting false positives, and this is a key area that we have already asked the vendor to improve on, in general. On a different note, there is one feature that isn't completely available right now where you can integrate Seeker with an open-source vulnerability scanner or composition analysis tool such as Black Duck. I would very much like this capability to be available to us out-of-the-box, so that we can easily integrate with tools like Black Duck in such a way that any open source components that are used in the front-end are easily identified. I think this would be a huge plus for Seeker. Another feature within Seeker which could benefit from improvement is active verification, which lets you actively verify a vulnerability. This feature currently doesn't work in certain applications, particularly in scenarios where you have requested tokens. When we bought the tool, we didn't realize this and we were not told about it by the vendor, so initially it was a big challenge for us to overcome it and properly begin our deployment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."
"It comes with all of the templates that we need. For example, we are a company that is regulated by PCI. In order to be PCI compliant, we have a lot of checks and procedures to which we have to comply."
"You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"The UI was very intuitive."
"I like the recording feature."
"IBM AppScan has made our work easy, as we can do four to five scans of websites at a time, which saves time when it comes to vulnerability."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"The security and the dashboard are the most valuable features."
"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
 

Cons

"We would like to integrate with some of the other reporting tools that we're planning to use in the future."
"They have to improve support."
"​IBM Security AppScan Source is rather hard to use​."
"The solution needs to improve in some areas. The tool needs to add more languages. It also needs to improve its speed."
"Sometimes it doesn't work so well."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"The solution could improve by having a mobile version."
"One thing which I think can be improved is the CI/CD Integration"
"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
"With the features, that they offer, and the support, they offer, AppScan pricing is on a higher level."
"The product is moderately priced, though it's an investment due to extensive code analysis needs."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"The tool was expensive."
"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 is very expensive."
"The solution is cheap."
"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
They could incorporate AI to enhance vulnerability detection and improve the product's reporting capabilities.
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
We use AppScan primarily for security testing and performance monitoring across our systems.
What do you like most about Seeker?
A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppSca...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Seeker?
The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year.
What needs improvement with Seeker?
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. Ho...
 

Also Known As

IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
El Al Airlines and Société Française du Radiotelephone
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.