We performed a comparison between Invicti and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."
"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."
"The dashboard is really cool, and the features are really good. It tells you about the software version you're using in your web application. It gives you the entire technology stack, and that really helps. Both web and desktop apps are good in terms of application scanning. It has a lot of security checks that are easily customizable as per your requirements. It also has good customer support."
"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."
"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."
"For pentesting scenarios, this is the number one tool. It can capture the request, and there are so many functions that are very good for that. For example, a black box satellite host."
"The solution is quite helpful for session management and configuration."
"You can download different plugins if you don't have them in the standard edition."
"It was easy to learn."
"It is a time-saver application."
"The solution has a pretty simple setup."
"I find the attack model quite amazing, where I can write my scripts and load my scripts as well, which helps quite a bit. All the active scanning that it can do is also quite a lot helpful. It speeds up our vulnerability assessment and penetration testing. Right now, I am enjoying its in-browser, which also helps quite a bit. I'm always confused about setting up some proxy, but it really is the big solution we all want."
"You can scan any number of applications and it updates its database."
"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."
"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."
"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."
"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."
"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."
"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."
"I would like to see a more optimized solution, as it currently uses a lot of CPU power and memory."
"As with most automated security tools, too many false positives."
"There is a lot to this product, and it would be good if when you purchase the tool, they can provide us with a more extensive user manual."
"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 biggest drawback is reporting. It's not so good. I can download them, but they're not so informative."
"The tool is very expensive."
"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."
"We wish that the Spider feature would appear in the same shape that it does in previous versions."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Invicti is ranked 20th in Application Security Tools with 25 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 9th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews. Invicti is rated 8.2, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Veracode and Fortify WebInspect, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Veracode. See our Invicti vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security 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.