We performed a comparison between Acunetix and GitLab 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."The tool's most valuable feature is scan configurations. We use it for external physical applications. The scanning time depends on the application's code."
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"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."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"The most valuable features of GitLab are the CI/CD pipeline and code management."
"We have seen a couple of merge requests or pull requests raised in GitLab. I see the interface, the way it shows the difference between the two source codes, that it is easy for anyone to do the review and then accept the request; the pull request is the valuable feature."
"GitLab's best features are maintenance, branch integration, and development infrastructure."
"The most valuable features of GitLab are the review, patch repo, and plans are in YAML."
"I like that you can use GitLab as a double-sided solution for both DevOps and version management. It's a good product for working in these two areas, and the user interface makes it easy to understand."
"The solution makes the CI/CD pipelines easy to execute."
"We like that we can have an all-encompassing product and don't have to implement different solutions."
"The solution has an established roadmap that lays out its plans for upgrades over the next two to three years."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched."
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents."
"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."
"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"It should be easier to recreate something manually, with the manual tool, because Acunetix is an automatic tool. If it finds something, it should be easier to manually replicate it. Sometimes you don't get the raw data from the input and output, so that could be improved."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"The price of GitLab could improve, it is high."
"GitLab could improve by having more plugins and better user-friendliness."
"The initial setup was quite challenging because it takes some time to understand how to pull out or push the code."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly. We do most of our operations through the website interface but it could be better."
"GitLab can improve by integrating with more tools, such as servers with Docker."
"It's more related to the supporting layer of features, such as issue management and issue tracking. We tend to always use, for example, Jira next to it. That doesn't mean that GitLab should build something similar to Jira because that will always have its place, but they could grow a bit in those kinds of supporting features. I see some, for example, covering ITSM on a DevOps team level, and that's one of the things that I and my current client would find really helpful. It's understandably not going to be their main focus and their core, and whenever you are with a company that needs a bit more advanced features on that specific topic, you're probably still going to integrate with another tool like Jira Service Management, for example. However, some basic features on things like that could be really helpful."
"The integration could be slightly better."
"Based on what I know so far, its integration with Kubernetes is not so good. We have to develop many things to make it work. We have to acquire third-party components to work with Kubernetes."
Acunetix is ranked 15th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while GitLab is ranked 7th in Application Security Tools with 68 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while GitLab is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify WebInspect and HCL AppScan, whereas GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, SonarQube and Tekton. See our Acunetix vs. GitLab report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors, best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors, and best DevSecOps 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.