We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Polyspace Code Prover 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."We are able to create a report which shows the PCI DSS scoring and share it with the application teams. Then, they can correlate and see exactly what they need to fix, and why."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."
"Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"The jargon used makes it difficult for project managers to understand the issues, and the technical explanations used make it difficult for developers to understand issues. These things should be simplified much more. That would be very helpful for us when explaining to them what needs to be fixed. The report output needs to be simplified."
"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"The tool has some stability issues."
Acunetix is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Klocwork, CodeSonar and Parasoft SOAtest. See our Acunetix vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
