

Acunetix and GitHub are both prominent in their respective fields, with Acunetix focusing on web security and GitHub emphasizing source code management and collaboration. In terms of advanced security features, Acunetix appears to have the upper hand with its dedicated tools for security scanning, while GitHub shines in collaboration and integration with development tools.
Features: Acunetix is recognized for its advanced vulnerability scanning features like Interactive Application Security Testing (IAST), customizable scan configurations, and login sequence recordings. It simplifies the security testing process with automated and detailed vulnerability assessments. GitHub, on the other hand, stands out in source code management with strong capabilities in branching, merging, and integration with tools such as Jenkins and Azure DevOps, making it apt for team collaboration and version control.
Room for Improvement: Users of Acunetix suggest improvements in internal tools such as the IAST module and enhancements in pricing flexibility and false-positive rates. GitHub can improve its security integrations and user-friendliness, especially for non-developers, while advancing project management features and handling of large files and merge conflicts.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix offers versatile deployment options, including on-premises and hybrid cloud, but users face challenges with technical support responsiveness. GitHub excels with extensive public, private, and hybrid cloud deployment options, and receives positive feedback for community support, though its technical support is predominantly ticket-based.
Pricing and ROI: Acunetix's pricing is regarded as expensive with concerns about its cost-effectiveness relative to feature offerings, though it promises ROI if utilized extensively. GitHub offers flexible and affordable pricing structures, especially with free tiers available, providing cost-effectiveness and perceived ROI benefits for collaborative projects.
It saves a significant amount of time by covering attack surfaces.
I have seen a return on investment, as Acunetix helps reduce the man-days and effort needed for scanning bulk applications through automated assessments.
I have seen a return on investment with Acunetix, including time saved and cost reduction, because it provides us threats on our web application servers.
For high-severity issues, they reach out within two to three hours, and for critical issues, a response is received within 15 minutes.
The technical support from Invicti is very good and fast.
Support staff not being familiar with the problem.
The technical support from GitHub is generally good, and they communicate effectively.
Some forums help you get answers faster since you just type in your concern and see resolutions from other engineers.
I have not used GitHub's technical support extensively because there are many resources and a robust knowledge base available due to the large user community.
Acunetix can handle increasing workloads and more applications easily.
Acunetix's scalability for my growing needs is great; it is a very scalable product compared to others.
We have never had a problem with scalability, so I would rate it at least eight to nine.
GitHub is more scalable than on-prem solutions, allowing for cloud-based scaling which is beneficial for processing large workloads efficiently.
I did not need to reach customer support because the product is very stable.
If a skilled developer uses it, it is ten out of ten for stability.
It provides a reliable environment for code management.
GitHub is mostly stable, but there can be occasional hiccups.
The main concern is related to false positives; Acunetix needs to work on identifying valid and invalid findings.
Acunetix should have better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps.
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.
When working with the CI/CD pipeline and somebody is writing the workflow file, it would be best to include the AI feature so if they write incorrect code, it will notify me about it in the same dashboard, eliminating the need to use third-party tools to review the file.
I am providing this feedback for Copilot because it seems more widespread and more companies allow it rather than Amp, and it would be beneficial if they catch up with Amp on this capability.
Security could make GitHub better. OWASP Top Ten security advisors could be integrated on GitHub, and it could provide checks and advice.
The pricing cost is affordable for small and mid-sized organizations, and when compared to Checkmarx, it is significantly affordable, as Checkmarx is quite expensive.
We secured a special licensing model for penetration testing companies, which is cost-effective.
The pricing of Acunetix is pretty expensive and could be improved.
Normally, GitHub is not expensive, but it would be welcome if it reduces costs for developing countries.
The pricing of GitHub is reasonable, with the cost being around seven dollars per user per month for private repositories.
The pricing of GitHub depends on the choice of solutions, such as building one's own GitHub Runners to save money or using GitHub's Runners with extra costs.
Its most valuable role is in enhancing security by identifying potential vulnerabilities efficiently.
The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities.
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 pull request facility for code review.
GitHub Actions allow for creating multiple jobs that run in different stages such as build, test, and deploy, which enable better visibility and control over the deployment pipeline.
For branching, it works well, especially in an agile environment.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| GitHub | 1.1% |
| Acunetix | 2.3% |
| Other | 96.6% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 15 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 8 |
| Large Enterprise | 16 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 42 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 49 |
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.
GitHub is a web-based Git repository hosting service. It offers all of the distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, and wikis for every project.
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.