We performed a comparison between ImmuniWeb and OWASP Zap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."After the assessment, you clearly know which assets require penetration testing."
"ImmuniWeb boasts a robust vulnerability detection mechanism, formidable threat mitigation, and an efficient remediation process, incorporating automation techniques and ALM strategies. The solution is highly stable. The solution is scalable. Editing Key Points for Review "Review about ImmuniWeb" What is our primary use case? We use the solution when we face challenges and urgent attention is needed for complex cases from our clients. To address this, we collaborate with the middleware, internal, and client teams to analyze and sort through intricate logs concerning our business cybersecurity program. How has it helped my organization? The solution helped us with one of our clients in the New York area contacted us about a data breach. In response, we swiftly organized a case meeting involving our client, internal, and email customer support teams. Together, we conducted an incident response, facilitating offline assistance for proper planning and risk management processes. We delved into the details of the data breach, identified how it occurred, and collaborated to rectify the issue. The client expressed satisfaction with the resolution process. What is most valuable? ImmuniWeb boasts a robust vulnerability detection mechanism, formidable threat mitigation, and an efficient remediation process, incorporating automation techniques and ALM strategies. It also focuses on consumer satisfaction and operates in English-speaking markets, primarily required by the UAE, the United States, Canada, and Australia, among other developed countries. For how long have I used the solution? We have been using this product for the past one and half years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The solution is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution is scalable. I rate it a nine out of ten. How are customer service and support? Support is generally excellent"
"ImmuniWeb is stable."
"The most valuable features are the SLA of Zero false-positives, less time of service development, validation of unlimited patched vulnerabilities, and several others."
"I like the fully automated continuous discovery run by ImmuniWeb in the background. We do not need to rerun the same tests or the same scanning against our resources. We need to supply our IP addresses, domain names, and significant resources with special domain names and URLs, and we need to do it only once. Then we always have an up-to-date picture. I also like the integration with our single sign-on system. We do not need to maintain a separate set of usernames or user accounts. We can plug this ImmuniWeb service into our authentication technology, enabling two-factor authentication. We have secure authentication right out of the box. The other important feature I like is the executive view. You can easily switch from a technical view to an executive view and have a helicopter view of the compliance status. We can see how much effort is required and our current status."
"The initial setup process is user-friendly."
"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"Simple to use, good user interface."
"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."
"The reporting is quite intuitive, which gives you a clear indication of what kind of vulnerability you have that you can drill down on to gather more information."
"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."
"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."
"This solution has improved my organization because it has made us feel safer doing frequent deployments for web applications. If we have something really big, we might get some professional company in to help us but if we're releasing small products, we will check it ourselves with Zap. It makes it easier and safer."
"A great idea would be to make a mobile application for the ImmuniWeb portal so that all information would be available on the go and from a mobile phone as well. It would be much more convenient."
"The deployment process on the cloud is straightforward, while on-premise can be complex. Support is generally excellent, although there can be delays in ticket resolution."
"ImmuniWeb sometimes shows previous scans instead of running tests."
"The product’s interface for the web applications could be similar to Android and iOS versions."
"A great idea would be to support using Discovery on the internal network, allowing delivery of all the features of the current Discovery to internal network resources."
"Its technical support could be better."
"It would be better if they had an automated tagging feature. The tagging functionality currently requires manual tagging, and that's probably the most needed feature from my standpoint. We also do not have enough tools, enough features, or options to display different resources in the way we need. There are basic grouping and some filtering features, but we still cannot fully separate some flavors of our resources. However, we may not be aware of the latest features."
"The port scanner is a little too slow."
"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."
"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."
"Sometimes, we get some false positives."
"I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help."
"It doesn't run on absolutely every operating system."
"It needs more robust reporting tools."
"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."
ImmuniWeb is ranked 17th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 7 reviews while OWASP Zap is ranked 8th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 37 reviews. ImmuniWeb is rated 8.2, while OWASP Zap is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ImmuniWeb writes "Easy initial setup process, but reporting feature for web scanning tools need improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security ". ImmuniWeb is most compared with Qualys Web Application Scanning, Acunetix, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, Veracode and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, whereas OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Veracode. See our ImmuniWeb vs. OWASP Zap report.
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.
