Most Helpful Review
Enables us to automatically submit each new build for scanning and get results directly into our JIRA
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner vs. Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
371,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
We used it for performing security checks. We have many Java applications and Android applications. Essentially it was used for checking the security validations for compliance purposes.
I have used this solution in multiple projects for vulnerability testing and finding security leaks within the code.
The most valuable feature comes from the fact that it is cloud-based, and I can scale up without having to worry about any other infrastructure needs.
We are using the Veracode tools to expose the engineers to the security vulnerabilities that were introduced with the new features, i.e. a lot faster or sooner in the development life cycle.
One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important.
It has an easy-to-use interface.
Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools.
It has almost completely eliminated the presence of SQLi vulnerabilities.
The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution.
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.
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 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.
One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that.
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.
One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers.
It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites.
Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface.
Attacking feature: Actually, attacking is not a solo feature. It contains many attack engines, Hawk, and many properties. But Netsparker's attacking mechanism is very flexible. This increases the vulnerability detection rate. Also, Netsparker made the Hawk for real-time interactive command-line-based exploit testing. It's very valuable for a vulnerability scanner.
When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done.
The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running.
One of the things that we have from a reporting point of view, is that we would love to see a graphical report. If you look through a report for something that has come back from Veracode, it takes a whole lot of time to just go through all the pages of the code to figure out exactly what it says. We know certain areas don’t have the greatest security features but those are usually minor and we don’t want to see those types of notifications.
Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them.
I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages.
Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis.
We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times. That kind of feature would save us time.
Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives.
The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report.
It needs more timely support for newer languages and framework versions.
In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us.
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.
You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing.
We have had issues during upgrades where their scans worked on some apps better with previous versions. Then, we had to work with their tech support, who were great, to get it fixed for the next version.
Integration into other tools is very limited for Acunetix. While we're trying to incorporate a CI/CD process where we're integrating with JIRA and we're integrating with Jenkins and Chef, it becomes problematic. Other tools give you a high integration capability to connect into different solutions that you may already have, like JIRA.
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.
Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing.
The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow.
The custom attack preparation screen might be improved.
It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities.
The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker.
Pricing and Cost Advice
They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey.
They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works.
Veracode has been fair. We use their SaaS solution and it's just an annual subscription.
No issues, the pricing seems reasonable.
It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool.
I recommend going for a one-year licensing with CA, because currently they are the leaders in this field with more features and a much better turn around time with a cheaper position, but there are a lot of new companies coming up in the market and they are building up their platforms.
Costs are reasonable. No special infrastructure is required and the license model is good.
I think the pricing is in line with the rest of the tools. I think you get what you pay for. It is certainly not inexpensive, but the value proposition is there. There are certainly cheaper tools, but I don't think we'd be getting the support that we get with those, and that is what separates this product from the others.
The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000.
All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio.
The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable.
When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted.
Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special.
The price should be 20% lower
I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on.
We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits.
Compared 47% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Also Known As
Veracode is an application security company that offers an automated cloud-based service for securing web, mobile and third-party enterprise applications. Veracode provides multiple security analysis technologies on a single platform, including static analysis, dynamic analysis, mobile application behavioral analysis and software composition analysis.
Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.
Netsparker finds and reports web application vulnerabilities such as SQL Injection and Cross-site Scripting (XSS) on all types of web applications, regardless of the platform and technology they are built with. Netsparker's unique and dead accurate Proof-Based scanning technology does not just report vulnerabilities, it also produces a Proof of Concept to confirm they are not false positives, freeing you from having to double check the identified vulnerabilities.
Learn More About Veracode
Stay Up-To-Date on Application Security
Learn more about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner
Learn more about Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner
|State of Missouri, Rekner||Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand||Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank|
Financial Services Firm35%
Software R&D Company36%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm9%
No Data Available
No Data Available
No Data Available