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

Akamai API Security vs Seeker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Akamai API Security
Ranking in API Security
1st
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Seeker
Ranking in API Security
16th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (18th), Mobile Threat Defense (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the API Security category, the mindshare of Akamai API Security is 24.5%, down from 26.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Seeker is 1.1%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Security
 

Featured Reviews

Deepesh  Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Excellent API authentication support but needs better analytics and reporting
I conducted a proof of concept for four months to identify PII and financial information exposed through APIs. Primarily, the API part is effective. I have been using Akamai AppMyWAF. The tool's API authentication, tokenization, and enhanced scalability and performance are valuable features. Akamai's support is impeccable, and its plug-and-play features are helpful.
San K - PeerSpot reviewer
More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities
One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need. The purposes for which applications are designed may differ in practice in the industry, and because of this, there will always be tools that sometimes report false positives. Thus, there should be some means with which I can customize the way that Seeker learns about our applications, possibly by using some kind of AI / ML capability within the tool that will automatically reduce the number of false positives that we get as we use the tool over time. Obviously, when we first start using the scanning tool there will be false positives, but as it keeps going and as I keep using the tool, there should be a period of time where either the application can learn how to ignore false positives, or I can customize it do so. Adding this type of functionality would definitely prevent future issues when it comes to reporting false positives, and this is a key area that we have already asked the vendor to improve on, in general. On a different note, there is one feature that isn't completely available right now where you can integrate Seeker with an open-source vulnerability scanner or composition analysis tool such as Black Duck. I would very much like this capability to be available to us out-of-the-box, so that we can easily integrate with tools like Black Duck in such a way that any open source components that are used in the front-end are easily identified. I think this would be a huge plus for Seeker. Another feature within Seeker which could benefit from improvement is active verification, which lets you actively verify a vulnerability. This feature currently doesn't work in certain applications, particularly in scenarios where you have requested tokens. When we bought the tool, we didn't realize this and we were not told about it by the vendor, so initially it was a big challenge for us to overcome it and properly begin our deployment.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The API part is effective."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its integration with API gateways, WAP and with part of their SDLC."
"API throttling is the most valuable feature of Akamai API Security."
"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."
 

Cons

"The challenge I found was with contextualization and how analytics are generated."
"It would be beneficial to use machine learning and API throttling together to identify how the APIs are called and whether it's coming from the right person or the wrong person."
"I think it would be good if they can integrate more with API gateways as this is currently limited."
"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a limit to the number of APIs we can use inside a bundle, and we have to pay extra if we exceed that limit."
"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
849,600 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Akamai API Security?
API throttling is the most valuable feature of Akamai API Security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Akamai API Security?
I mentioned that support from Akamai is expensive yet it is worth it.
What needs improvement with Akamai API Security?
The challenge I found was with contextualization and how analytics are generated. Reports were sent in a raw format without proper analytics. There was no mechanism to identify which APIs will alwa...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Noname Security
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
El Al Airlines and Société Française du Radiotelephone
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai, F5, Checkmarx and others in API Security. Updated: March 2025.
849,600 professionals have used our research since 2012.