We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Synopsys API Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Testing (AST)."The solution is highly stable."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"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 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."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"Picks up weaknesses in our app setups."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."
"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 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."
"The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"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."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"The solution required us to use our team and we spoke to Synopsys API Security Testing's support to do the implementation. We use two people from our team for the implementation. and one person for maintenance."
Acunetix is ranked 11th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 26 reviews while Synopsys API Security Testing is ranked 29th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 1 review. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Synopsys API Security Testing is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Synopsys API Security Testing writes "Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Synopsys API Security Testing is most compared with Seeker, Fortify WebInspect and OWASP Zap.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
