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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Synopsys Defensics 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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Fuzz Testing Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th)
Synopsys Defensics
Ranking in Fuzz Testing Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Fuzz Testing Tools category, the mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 30.8%, up from 29.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Synopsys Defensics is 23.1%, up from 12.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Fuzz Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.
it_user508521 - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps us complete testing more quickly by eliminating many unwanted test cases
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, and from that we can generate automated test cases, but what happens on the target device, what is the reason for the crash, for that we have to do manual debugging. They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful. They can improve a lot on that.

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 features are Burp Intruder and Burp Scanner."
"It's good testing software."
"It offers flexibility, macros, and features to reduce the effort required for authenticated sessions."
"The automated scan is what I find most useful because a lot of customers will need it. Not every domain will be looking for complete security, they just need a stamp on the security key. For these kinds of customers, the scan works really well."
"The active scanner, which does an automated search of any web vulnerabilities."
"The Spider is the most useful feature. It helps to analyze the entire web application, and it finds all the passes and offers an automated identification of security issues."
"The intercepting feature is the most valuable."
"The way they do the research and they keep their profile up to date is great. They identify vulnerabilities and update them immediately."
"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."
"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."
 

Cons

"We'd like to have more integration potential across all versions of the product."
"Scanning needs to be improved in enterprise and professional versions."
"The biggest drawback is reporting. It's not so good. I can download them, but they're not so informative."
"Scanning APIs using PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional takes a lot of time."
"BurpSuite has some issues regarding authentication with OAT tokens that need to be improved."
"Improvement should be done as per the requirements of customers."
"If your application uses multi-factor authentication, registration management cannot be automated."
"Integration is a big problem."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"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."
"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The yearly cost is about $300."
"It's a lower priced tool that we can rely on with good standard mechanisms."
"PortSwigger is reasonably-priced. It's fair."
"At $400 or $500 per license paid annually, it is a very cheap tool."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution, which is neither cheap nor expensive."
"It is a cheap solution, but it may not be cheaper than other solutions."
"They should reduce the license cost a little bit. It is $400 per user, and it would be better if they could reduce the licensing fee."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"Licensing is a bit expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fuzz Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
22%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Burp
Defensics, Codenomicon Defensics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks
Find out what your peers are saying about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Synopsys Defensics and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.