We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Spirent CyberFlood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"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."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"The automated approach to these repetitive discovery attempts would take days to do manually and therefore it helps reduce the time needed to do an assessment."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool."
"CyberFlood is flexible."
"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."
"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."
"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."
"We want to see how much bandwidth usage it consumes. When we monitor traffic we have issues with the consumption and throttling of the traffic."
"Tools that would allow us to work more efficiently with the mobile environment, with Android and iOS."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"The vulnerability identification speed should be improved."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"There's a clear need for a reduction in pricing to make the service more accessible."
"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."
"The pricing is a bit on the higher side."
"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."
"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."
"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."
"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."
Acunetix is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Spirent CyberFlood is ranked 33rd in Application Security Tools with 4 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Spirent CyberFlood is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spirent CyberFlood writes "I like the solution's flexibility". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Spirent CyberFlood is most compared with Ixia BreakingPoint and Ixia BreakingPoint VE. See our Acunetix vs. Spirent CyberFlood report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
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.