We performed a comparison between Invicti 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)."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."
"It correctly parses DOM and JS and has really good support for URL Rewrite rules, which is important for today's websites."
"I am impressed with Invictus’ proof-based scanning. The solution has reduced the incidence of false positive vulnerabilities. It has helped us reduce our time and focus on vulnerabilities."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."
"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."
"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."
"The most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."
"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."
"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."
"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"The solution needs to make a more specific report."
"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."
"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."
Invicti is ranked 15th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 25 reviews while Synopsys API Security Testing is ranked 29th in Application Security Testing (AST). Invicti is rated 8.2, while Synopsys API Security Testing is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Synopsys API Security Testing writes "Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support". Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning and HCL AppScan, whereas Synopsys API Security Testing is most compared with Seeker, Fortify WebInspect, OWASP Zap and Acunetix.
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.