We performed a comparison between Invicti and OWASP Zap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."
"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."
"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."
"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."
"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."
"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."
"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."
"I am impressed by the whole technology that they are using in this solution. It is really fast. When using netscan, the confirmation that it gives on the vulnerabilities is pretty cool. It is really easy to configure a scan in Netsparker Web Application Security Scanner. It is also really easy to deploy."
"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."
"Two features are valuable. The first one is that the scan gets completed really quickly, and the second one is that even though it searches in a limited scope, what it does in that limited scope is very good. When you use Zap for testing, you're only using it for specific aspects or you're only looking for certain things. It works very well in that limited scope."
"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."
"You can run it against multiple targets."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. I think it's stable enough. I don't see any crashes within the application, so its stability is high."
"The solution has tightened our security."
"The ZAP scan and code crawler are valuable features."
"They offer free access to some other tools."
"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."
"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"The support's response time could be faster since we are in different time zones."
"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."
"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."
"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."
"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."
"I think that it freezes without any specific reason at times. This needs to be looked into."
"If there was an easier to understand exactly what has been checked and what has not been checked, it would make this solution better. We have to trust that it has checked all known vulnerabilities but it's a bit hard to see after the scanning."
"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."
"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."
"The port scanner is a little too slow."
"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."
"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."
"It would be ideal if I could try some pre-built deployment scenarios so that I don't have to worry about whether the configuration sector team is doing it right or wrong. That would be very helpful."
"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."
Invicti is ranked 15th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 25 reviews while OWASP Zap is ranked 7th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 37 reviews. Invicti is rated 8.2, while OWASP Zap is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security ". Invicti is most compared with Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Veracode and Fortify WebInspect, whereas OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and HCL AppScan. See our Invicti vs. OWASP Zap report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
