Contrast Security Assess vs Invicti comparison

Read 27 Invicti reviews

3,137 Views
1,662 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Invicti and Contrast Security Assess compete in the application security solutions category. Invicti is generally favored for its cost-effectiveness and support quality, while Contrast Security Assess stands out for its robust features offering comprehensive security solutions.

Features: Invicti offers automated security testing, efficient vulnerability detection, and thorough reporting. Contrast Security Assess provides real-time application security monitoring, integration into the software development lifecycle, and continuous assessment for proactive management.

Room for Improvement: Invicti could improve integration with development tools, streamline user interfaces, and enhance scalability options. Contrast Security Assess could offer clearer guidance, simplify its learning curve, and reduce initial setup complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Invicti is known for easy deployment and reliable customer support, suitable for a wide range of teams. Contrast Security Assess has a complex deployment but ensures comprehensive support for its advanced features.

Pricing and ROI: Invicti has lower setup costs and users report a favorable ROI. Contrast Security Assess might have higher initial costs but delivers significant returns over time with enhanced security features.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Invicti Report (Updated: October 2024).

Contrast Security Assess vs. Invicti

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 814,649 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

24th

Average Rating

8.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th)

Invicti

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

14th

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

API Security (5th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Invicti is 1.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at Deloitte

Nov 27, 2023

A stable solution that provides lots of details on web-based vulnerabilities and source code reviews

Contrast Security Assess has a really good UI and gives the details in more depth. It gives more information about web application vulnerabilities. If third-party libraries, JS files, and JAR files have any CVEs in them, the solution reports that and gives a grade from A to E. It gives good…

Read full review

Akshay Waghmare

Manager at Deloitte

Nov 9, 2023

A stable and user-friendly solution that can be used for dynamic application security testing

We use Invicti for dynamic application security testing and to integrate files into the pipeline The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan. The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved. I have been…

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

"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."

"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."

"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."

"This tool is really fast and the information that they provide on vulnerabilities is pretty good."

"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."

"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."

"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."

"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."

More Invicti pros

Cons

"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."

"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."

"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."

"The solution needs to make a more specific report."

"Reporting should be improved. The reporting options should be made better for end-users. Currently, it is possible, but it's not the best. Being able to choose what I want to see in my reports rather than being given prefixed information would make my life easier. I had to depend on the API for getting the content that I wanted. If they could fix the reporting feature to make it more comprehensive and user-friendly, it would help a lot of end-users. Everything else was good about this product."

"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."

"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."

"They need to improve their support in the documentation. Their support mechanism is missing. Their responsiveness, technical staff, and these types of things need to be improved, and comprehensive documentation is required. They should have good self-service portal enhancement"

More Invicti cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"The solution is expensive."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"It is competitive in the security market."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

More Invicti pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

Educational Organization

55%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Contrast Security Assess?

The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten.

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to ...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner?

The inventory prices are very competitive. The competitors are more expensive, but the estimated cost of Invicti is more competitive than that of other tools. They had very good pricing. We have di...

What do you like most about Invicti?

The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan.

What needs improvement with Invicti?

Invicti has provided a roadmap outlining the improvements they're focusing on. Given the competition, with tools like Qualys and many others in the market, the interface needs to be enhanced, integ...

Seeker vs Contrast Security Assess

Comparisons

Compared 20% of the time

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 18% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 13% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

OWASP Zap vs Invicti

Compared 17% of the time

Acunetix vs Invicti

Compared 16% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Invicti

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Invicti

Compared 6% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Invicti

Compared 5% of the time

More Invicti Competitors

Product Reports

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Contrast Security Assess

November 2024

Download Invicti product report

October 2024

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

Netsparker

Learn More

Contrast Security

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Invicti helps DevSecOps teams automate security tasks and save hundreds of hours each month by identifying web vulnerabilities that matter. Combining dynamic with interactive testing (DAST + IAST) and software composition analysis (SCA), Invicti scans every corner of an app to find what other tools miss with 99.98% accuracy, delivering on the promise of Zero Noise AppSec. Invicti helps discover all web assets — even ones that are lost, forgotten, or created by rogue departments. With an array of out-of-the-box integrations, DevSecOps teams can get ahead of their workloads to hit critical deadlines, improve processes, and communicate more effectively while reducing risk and hitting the ROI goals.

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Samsung, The Walt Disney Company, T-Systems, ING Bank