We performed a comparison between PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Seeker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"The solution is quite helpful for session management and configuration."
"I am impressed with the tool's detailed analysis for penetration testing. AppScan can give only visibility, but it can't do the PT part. But the PortSwigger Burp Application can do both, and it gives much more visibility on the PT rating."
"The Spider is the most useful feature. It helps to analyze the entire web application, and it finds all the passes and offers an automated identification of security issues."
"The Repeater and the BApp extensions are particularly useful. Certain extensions, such as the Active Scan extensions and the Autoracer extension, are very good."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the dashboard. It is very informative and you can receive all the information you need in one place. It's clear, well-defined, and organized. Anybody without any cybersecurity can use it."
"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."
"Scanning APIs using PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional takes a lot of time."
"A lot of our interns find it difficult to get used to PortSwigger Burp's environment."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"I need the solution to be more user-friendly. The solution needs to be user-friendly."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional can improve by having more features in the free version for beginners to try."
"The pricing of the solution is quite high."
"It should provide a better way to integrate with Jenkins so that DAST (dynamic application security testing) can be automated."
"The solution doesn't offer very good scalability."
"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."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 5th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 57 reviews while Seeker is ranked 24th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 1 review. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6, while Seeker is rated 7.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Seeker writes "More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities". PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas Seeker is most compared with Synopsys API Security Testing, Coverity, Contrast Security Assess, Polaris Software Integrity Platform and HCL AppScan.
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.
