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

Acunetix vs Defensics Protocol Fuzzing 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

Acunetix
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (12th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (7th), Vulnerability Management (19th), DevSecOps (6th)
Defensics Protocol Fuzzing
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Fuzz Testing Tools (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Acunetix is designed for Application Security Tools and holds a mindshare of 2.3%, down 2.5% compared to last year.
Defensics Protocol Fuzzing, on the other hand, focuses on Fuzz Testing Tools, holds 19.8% mindshare, down 20.3% since last year.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Acunetix2.3%
SonarQube17.9%
Checkmarx One10.2%
Other69.6%
Application Security Tools
Fuzz Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Defensics Protocol Fuzzing19.8%
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional31.4%
GitLab23.3%
Other25.5%
Fuzz Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rahul Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer - Penetration Tester at a government with 10,001+ employees
Identifies vulnerabilities across bulk web applications but needs better support and cleaner reports
The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers. The centralized dashboard of Acunetix gives visibility into the security aspects of mass applications; for instance, with more than 200 applications, it provides a valuable overview of findings and necessary fixes, along with a high-level summary that helps us achieve compliance through monthly and sometimes weekly scanning. In terms of reporting, Acunetix is excellent because it can generate different types of reports, such as an executive summary report, detailed reports, and developer reports that can be shared directly with developers. Acunetix positively impacts my organization by helping identify outdated libraries and applications, including legacy applications vulnerable to old attacks based on OWASP Top 10, thus aiding in compliance checks for PCI DSS and OWASP. Acunetix provides a centralized report with compliance-related aspects and a vulnerability timeline, effectively helping reduce vulnerabilities and save time.
SK
Senior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies
Product security tests for switches and router sections
Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install. What I see in the documentation isn't that. Even if something doesn't malfunction, sometimes it is hard to install and execute. The product needs video documentation. This would help a lot more.

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 of Acunetix is the UI and the scan results are simple."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"It can operate both as a standalone and it can be integrated with other applications, which makes it a very versatile solution to have."
"Their technical support has been very active. If I have an issue, I can reach out to them and get an answer pretty quick."
"Overall, it's a very good tool and a very good engine."
"If an organization has 100 plus applications and wants to use an automated scanner, they should definitely go ahead with Acunetix because it is very cost-effective and will save time compared to focusing on other solutions and performing manual security assessments."
"The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"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."
"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."
 

Cons

"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"I believe Acunetix can improve customer support, as the dedicated support staff are often unfamiliar with problems and troubleshooting, leading to communication gaps that delay issue resolution."
"While we do have it integrated with other solutions, it could still offer more integrations."
"When monitoring the traffic we always have issues with the bandwidth consumption and the throttling of traffic."
"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."
"Currently only supports web scanning."
"I think Acunetix needs improvement since it is now working with Invicti, so the price list will need to be reconsidered."
"Improving the handling of false positives would be beneficial because it can be challenging to trust the findings flagged by Acunetix, and those findings must be manually validated."
"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."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"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 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."
"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 applications in the license. So, you are stuck with the same license for the five applications for one full year."
"The costs aren't very expensive. It costs around $3000 or $4000."
"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."
"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."
"I would say that Acunetix is expensive because there are products on the market with similar features that are equally or better-priced."
"The solution is expensive."
"Licensing is a bit expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise17
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
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.
What is your primary use case for Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
My main use case for Acunetix is providing a vulnerability scanner for our web application server. I use Acunetix to scan our web security and discover vulnerabilities so we can patch these vulnera...
What advice do you have for others considering Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner?
My advice to others looking into using Acunetix is that it is really helpful to discover the web attacks and have great, powerful reporting so you can have reduced incidents to look at. I have rate...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

AcuSensor
Codenomicon Defensics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Joomla!, Digicure, Team Random, Credit Suisse, Samsung, Air New Zealand
Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: January 2026.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.