Acunetix vs Contrast Security Assess comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Acunetix and Contrast Security Assess 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.
To learn more, read our detailed Acunetix vs. Contrast Security Assess Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Our developers can run the attacks directly from their environments, desktops.""Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine.""The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution.""One of the features that I feel is groundbreaking, that I would like to see expanded on, is the IAS feature: The Interactive Application Security Testing module that gets loaded onto an application on a server, for more in-depth, granular findings. I think that is really neat. I haven't seen a lot of competitors doing that.""There is a lot of documentation on their website which makes setting it up and using it quite simple.""We use the solution for the scanning of vulnerabilities like SQL injections.""I haven't seen reporting of that level in any other tool.""Acunetix is the best service in the world. It is easy to manage. It gives a lot of information to the users to see and identify problems in their site or applications. It works very well."

More Acunetix Pros →

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product.""By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time.""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.""When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.""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.""No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime.""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.""I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

More Contrast Security Assess Pros →

Cons
"Acunetix needs to be dynamic with JavaScript code, unlike Netsparker which can scan complex agents.""The solution can be improved by adding the ability to scan subdomains automatically, and by providing reports that can be exported to external databases to share with other solutions.""There is room for improvement in website authentication because I've seen other products that can do it much better.""Acunetix needs to include agent analysis.""It would be nice to have a feature to "retest" only a single vulnerability that the customer reports as patched, and delete it from the next scans since it has already been patched.""The solution's pricing could be better.""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.""You can't actually change your password after you've set it unless you go back into the administration account and you change it there. Thus, if you're locked out and don't remember your password, that's a thing."

More Acunetix Cons →

"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.""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.""Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side.""The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities.""The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different.""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.""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.""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."

More Contrast Security Assess Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "When we looked at all other vendors and what they were asking for, to provide a third of what Acunetix was capable of doing, it was an easy decision... But now that it's coming to a cost where it's line with market value, it becomes more of a competition... Acunetix is raising the cost of licensing. It's 3.5 times what we were initially quoted."
  • "Acunetix was around the same price as all the other vendors we looked at, nothing special."
  • "The pricing and licensing are reasonable to a point. In order to run multiple scans at a time, we are going to have to purchase a 100 count license, which is an overkill. Though, compared to what we were paying for, the cost seems reasonable."
  • "All things considered, I think it has a good price/value ratio."
  • "The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
  • "I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
  • "The pricing is a little high, and moreover, it's kind of domain-based."
  • "When compared with other products, the pricing is a little bit high. But it gives value for the price. It serves the purpose and is worthwhile for the price we pay."
  • More Acunetix Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • More Contrast Security Assess Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:It is a bit expensive. If you need to check five applications, you have to pay almost 14,000. It is an agreement for two years at 7,000 per year for only five applications. You cannot change the… more »
    Top Answer:There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others.
    Top Answer:When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.
    Top Answer:The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten.
    Top Answer: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 the… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    5,195
    Comparisons
    3,878
    Reviews
    7
    Average Words per Review
    317
    Rating
    8.6
    Views
    1,481
    Comparisons
    900
    Reviews
    4
    Average Words per Review
    511
    Rating
    8.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    AcuSensor
    Contrast Assess
    Learn More
    Overview

    Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner is an automated web application security testing tool that audits your web applications by checking for vulnerabilities like SQL Injection, Cross site scripting, and other exploitable vulnerabilities.

    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.

    Sample Customers
    Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
    Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm31%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Media Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company17%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government9%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Insurance Company9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business38%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise42%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise59%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise55%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Buyer's Guide
    Acunetix vs. Contrast Security Assess
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Acunetix vs. Contrast Security Assess and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Acunetix is ranked 15th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while Contrast Security Assess is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while Contrast Security Assess is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Contrast Security Assess writes "We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify WebInspect and HCL AppScan, whereas Contrast Security Assess is most compared with Veracode, Fortify WebInspect, Seeker, Checkmarx and OWASP Zap. See our Acunetix vs. Contrast Security Assess report.

    See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.