We performed a comparison between Acunetix and ReversingLabs 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."Acunetix has an awesome crawler. It gives a referral site map of near targets and also goes really deep to find all the inputs without issues. This was valuable because it helped me find some files or directories, like web admin panels without authentication, which were hidden."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the speed at which it can scan multiple domains in just a few hours."
"It comes equipped with an internal applicator, which automatically identifies and addresses vulnerabilities within the program."
"The most important feature is that it's a web-based graphical user interface. That is a great addition. Also, the ability to schedule scans is great."
"For us, the most valuable aspect of the solution is the log-sequence feature."
"The vulnerability scanning option for analyzing the security loopholes on the websites is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"As far as the malware repository is concerned, it's extensive. It's a good source for finding samples, where we are unable to find them on other channels or by leveraging other sources."
"ReversingLabs has a large sample size."
"It offers reports on a great many more file types than the other analysis solutions we have. It can give us a more in-depth analysis and better reporting on a larger number of file types. It also gives us a more comprehensive score on a number of things as well, and that's why we're using it as a front-end filter. It gives us more information... It's valuable because of its depth of information, as well as the breadth it gives us. There aren't a lot of tools that cover all of the different file types."
"The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild."
"As far as static analysis information is concerned, we use most of the information that is available in order to determine whether or not we might be dealing with a malware variant. This includes information that is related to Java rules. This is also related to malware families indicated or specific malicious software variants that are labeled by name."
"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."
"There are some versions of the solution that are not as stable as others."
"The solution limits the number of scans. It would be much better if we could have unlimited scans."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the way the licensing model is currently is not very convenient for us because initially, when we bought it, the licensing model was very flexible, but now it restricts us."
"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."
"The solution's pricing could be better."
"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 product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets. Right now, I can only do them individually."
"While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased. Respective scripts are available, but those scripts which are available are typically not of very high quality."
"The solution needs to improve integrations."
"We would really like further integration with our threat intelligence platform, which is called ThreatConnect. We would also really like further integrations with an endpoint protection product we use called Tanium. The reason I mentioned both of these is that ReversingLabs claims to have extensive integrations with both of them, but they did not work for us."
Acunetix is ranked 17th in Application Security Tools with 26 reviews while ReversingLabs is ranked 29th in Application Security Tools with 4 reviews. Acunetix is rated 7.6, while ReversingLabs is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Acunetix writes "Fantastic reporting features hindered by slow scanning ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ReversingLabs writes "We use the product for data enrichment or downloading malicious programs that we are otherwise unable to find". Acunetix is most compared with OWASP Zap, Tenable.io Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, HCL AppScan and Fortify WebInspect, whereas ReversingLabs is most compared with VirusTotal, CrowdStrike Falcon, Black Duck, Flashpoint Intelligence Platform and Snyk. See our Acunetix vs. ReversingLabs report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
