Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Acunetix vs Tenable.io Web Application Scanning comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Acunetix
Ranking in Application Security Tools
12th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th), Vulnerability Management (17th), DevSecOps (5th)
Tenable.io Web Application ...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
21st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Acunetix is 2.5%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is 1.3%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

AnubhavGoswami - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
Harshal Deshmukh - PeerSpot reviewer
Simple tool to use, good dashboard capabilities and offers asset criticality ratings
It has good dashboard capabilities and gives good results with priority ratings, asset criticality ratings, and exposure scores for vulnerabilities. It also provides automated web application scanning, which customers appreciate because it doesn't disturb the web application or hamper the business. While testing the web application, sometimes it happens that the website or application goes down. But with Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, it doesn't affect the business. It has good unified web application scanning and exposure management.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops."
"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."
"Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden."
"I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention."
"It generates automated reports."
"There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple."
"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 tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable features of Tenable.io Web Application Scanning are the integration into specific use cases and scanning. All of the features of the solution are useful."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which provides a good level of detail with respect to vulnerabilities."
"It collects the vulnerabilities on the hostnames and sends them to the Tenable.io cloud. Tenable has its own cloud where Tenable.io is running, but there are many connectors to other cloud solutions. Tenable can do vulnerability scanning for other cloud managers such as Azure, Amazon, and so on."
"The most effective feature of the product is the ability to scan the entire environment."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It has good unified web application scanning and exposure management."
 

Cons

"The solution's pricing could be better."
"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."
"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."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"I had some issues with the JSON parameters where it found some strange vulnerabilities, but it didn't alert the person using it or me about these vulnerabilities, e.g., an error for SQL injection."
"There was an issue related to updates from the internet."
"Acunetix needs to improve its cost."
"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."
"It isn't easy to manage vulnerabilities in Tenable."
"They have a general dashboard for web application scanning, but the dashboards and reporting can be improved. They probably have some features in their roadmap."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning conducts a general scan, which wastes time. The scan needs to be specific."
"The report customization needs to be better."
"Sometimes it lags with different cloud environments."
"I would like for them to add proxy filtering, where you can transfer and alter the package. It is fully automated. Other web application testers programs are actually proxy software, and the proxy software gives you the flexibility of modifying the outgoing package, which will actually help you in exploiting any vulnerability in detail."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is not very user-friendly and you need a lot of information to get proper reports. The tool's support is not very responsive."
"The dashboard could be more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"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 price is exceptionally high."
"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."
"All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
"The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
"The cost is based on two types of licenses, ConsultLite, and ConsultPlus, as well as the number of domains that are scanned."
"I rate the product's pricing a four out of ten."
"The application is extremely affordable. There are no additional costs involved with licensing. We switched to Tenable.io Web Application Scanning from other solutions due to pricing."
"It follows the same licensing scheme as Tenable.io and Tenable. sc."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is expensive for small businesses."
"For Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, it comes to around 6,50,000 Indian rupees, plus taxes."
"The price of the solution is reasonable compared to the competitors. The license cost is based on the number of users and the annual usage."
"The pricing is okay."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
I use Acunetix for penetration testing purposes. This is the primary use case.
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.
What do you like most about Tenable.io Web Application Scanning?
The most effective feature of the product is the ability to scan the entire environment.
What needs improvement with Tenable.io Web Application Scanning?
We would like some additional features. Sometimes it lags with different cloud environments. Private clouds are becoming more common, and the integration lags with those compared to AWS, Azure, or ...
What advice do you have for others considering Tenable.io Web Application Scanning?
Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten. We deploy it for customers, and it's very easy to deploy. Some people are worried about the cost, but we try to sell it at a good rate, less than the o...
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
IMDEX
Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Tenable.io Web Application Scanning and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.