We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and Rapid7 AppSpider based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Technical support is helpful."
"I like the recording feature."
"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."
"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."
"AppScan is stable."
"The product has valuable features for static and dynamic testing."
"The static scans are good, and the SaaS as well."
"It highlights, with several grades of severity, the types of vulnerabilities, so we can focus on the most severe security vulnerabilities in the code."
"The initial deployment is very straightforward and simple. The product is stable if configured properly."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which is compliant with international standards."
"It is really accurate and the rate of false positives is very low."
"I like the ability the product has to detect vulnerabilities quickly, when it has been released in our environment, then displaying them to us."
"I would say that it is stable, as I am not aware of any major issues."
"The setup is usually straightforward."
"Rapid7 AppSpider is good at managing different applications. It uses applets and generates reports to cover the PCA/GDPR compliance requirements."
"The entire solution is interactive and has a point-and-click user experience, which makes it easy to find items or drill down on information. You don't need specialized skills to use the product."
"The product has some technical limitations."
"Improving usability could enhance the overall experience with AppScan. It would be beneficial to make the solution more user-friendly, ensuring that everyone can easily navigate and utilize its features."
"Improvement can be done as per customer requirements."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"Sometimes it doesn't work so well."
"They could add a software component analysis tool."
"IBM Security AppScan Source is rather hard to use."
"We would like to see a check in the specific vulnerabilities in mobile applications or rooted devices, such as jailbreaking devices."
"AppSpider has some problems with the RAM needed while scanning."
"There are some glitches with stability, and it is an area for improvement."
"One of the challenges I have with AppSpider is that it gives you a lot of false positives, especially when compared to other solutions."
"The tech support is responsive but issues remain unresolved."
"AppSpider could improve in the area of integration. They need to add more integration opportunities."
"This price of this solution is a little bit expensive."
"Support response times are slow and can be improved."
"Implementing Rapid7 AppSpider requires scanning and self-identification mechanisms. You can add different types of authentication to each scan."
HCL AppScan is ranked 12th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 41 reviews while Rapid7 AppSpider is ranked 25th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 13 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.8, while Rapid7 AppSpider is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 AppSpider writes "Useful vulnerability reporting data, flexible, and simple implementation". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, whereas Rapid7 AppSpider is most compared with Rapid7 InsightAppSec, OWASP Zap, Acunetix, Invicti and SonarQube. See our HCL AppScan vs. Rapid7 AppSpider 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.
