Acunetix vs Synopsys Defensics comparison

The compared Invicti and Black Duck solutions aren't in the same category. Invicti is ranked #12 in AS , with an average rating of 8.4, and holds a 2.5% mindshare in the category. Black Duck is ranked #5 in FTT , and holds a 20.5% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Invicti users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

Acunetix

Read 31 Acunetix reviews

3,761 Views
2,973 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Synopsys Defensics

Read 4 Synopsys Defensics reviews

136 Views
90 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Acunetix

Synopsys Defensics

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Synopsys Defensics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Security Tools Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (12th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th), Vulnerability Management (17th), DevSecOps (5th)

Synopsys Defensics

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Fuzz Testing Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Acunetix is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.5%, up 2.3% compared to last year.
Synopsys Defensics, on the other hand, focuses on Fuzz Testing Tools, holds 20.5% mindshare, up 12.0% since last year.

Application Security Tools

Fuzz Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

AnubhavGoswami

Compliance Manager at Compunnel

Attractive automated reports with boost user productivity and an easy setup

The primary use is mainly related to vulnerability assessment, including both public and internal IP addresses By using this tool, we have reduced the workload and increased the productivity of users. It generates automated reports. This feature is beneficial when sharing reports with clients as…

Read full review

it_user586716

Application Secutiy Engineer at a healthcare company with 11-50 employees

Technical support provided protocol-specific documentation to prove that some positives were not false.

A security assurance engineer was able to perform due diligence across all network-facing protocols. My prior organization designed, developed and deployed a Network Attached Storage (NAS) appliance. A key part of the company wide security assurance program for all products, is to perform penetration testing against all network facing IP ports. For the web, SSL and RESTful APIs, there are very good COTS and open source tools to perform Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) testing. Unfortunately for NAS protocols like SMB, NFS, CIFS, and iSCSI, I researched and found that Codenomicon Defensics was the only viable source to satisfy our DAST requirements. Through the use of Selenium for automated web testing, it was easily found out that Codenomicon Defensics could be integrated into our Continuous Integration / Continuous Deployment (CI / CD) Agile processes, specific to automated testing. Also, like many of the other application security testing products, Defensics incorporates automatic update support and works on Windows, MacOS and Linux desktops.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."

"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."

"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."

"By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process."

"The scalability is good. The scalability is more than good because it can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated as part of applications. So that really makes it a very, very versatile solution to have."

"The usability and overall scan results are good."

"We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections."

"The product is really easy to use."

More Acunetix pros

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."

"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."

Cons

"There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better."

"The solution's pricing could be better."

"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."

"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."

"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."

"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."

"It is difficult to create a proxy connection."

More Acunetix cons

"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."

"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."

"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Implementing Acunetix needs a medium or larger business agency, because you need some money to get Acunetix. It is costly, but if you care about your agency's security, then maybe it's a cost that might help you in the future."

"It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."

"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."

"The price is exceptionally high."

"When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."

"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."

"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."

"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."

More Acunetix pricing and cost advice

"Licensing is a bit expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

21%

Manufacturing Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

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.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

I use Acunetix for penetration testing purposes. This is the primary use case.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?

I rate the overall solution nine out of ten. I prefer Acunetix for its more precise and accurate results.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OWASP Zap vs Acunetix

Compared 16% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Acunetix

Compared 12% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Acunetix

Compared 10% of the time

Tenable.io Web Application Scanning vs Acunetix

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Enterprise Edition vs Acunetix

Compared 7% of the time

More Acunetix Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 26% of the time

Snyk vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 22% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 8% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 8% of the time

More Synopsys Defensics Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Acunetix

December 2024

Download Acunetix product report

Buyer's Guide

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Synopsys Defensics

December 2024

Download Synopsys Defensics product report

Also Known As

AcuSensor

Defensics, Codenomicon Defensics

Learn More

Invicti

Black Duck

Overview

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.

Defensics® fuzz testing is a comprehensive, powerful, and automated black box solution that enables organizations to effectively and efficiently discover and remediate security weaknesses in software. By taking a systematic and intelligent approach to negative testing, Defensics allows organizations to ensure software security without compromising on product innovation, increasing time to market, or inflating operational costs.

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand

Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

December 2024

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.