We performed a comparison between Apiiro and Invicti 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."Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly."
"The workflow automation is likely the best aspect of the solution."
"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."
"When we try to manually exploit the vulnerabilities, it often takes time to realize what's going on and what needs to be done."
"The dashboard is really cool, and the features are really good. It tells you about the software version you're using in your web application. It gives you the entire technology stack, and that really helps. Both web and desktop apps are good in terms of application scanning. It has a lot of security checks that are easily customizable as per your requirements. It also has good customer support."
"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."
"The most attractive feature was the reporting review tool. The reporting review was very impressive and produced very fruitful reports."
"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."
"Invicti's best feature is the ability to identify vulnerabilities and manually verify them."
"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."
"User management is a little bit clunky."
"I would like support for our self-hosted Git server, other than GitHub, just regular Git."
"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."
"The solution needs to make a more specific report."
"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."
"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."
"The license could be better. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license. It's a major hindrance that we are facing while scanning applications, and we have to be sure that the URLs are the same and not different so that we do not end up consuming another license for it. Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. The licensing is tied to the URL, and it's restricted. If you have a URL that you scanned once, like a website, you cannot retry that same license. If you are scanning the same website but in a different domain or different URL, you might end up paying for a second license. It would also be better if they provided proper support for multi-factor authentications. In the next release, I would like them to include good multi-factor authentication support."
"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."
"They don't really provide the proof of concept up to the level that we need in our organization. We are a consultancy firm, and we provide consultancy for the implementation and deployment solutions to our customers. When you run the scans and the scan is completed, it only shows the proof of exploit, which really doesn't work because the tool is running the scan and exploiting on the read-only form. You don't really know whether it is actually giving the proof of exploit. We cannot prove it manually to a customer that the exploit is genuine. It is really hard to perform it manually and prove it to the concerned development, remediation, and security teams. It is currently missing the static application security part of the application security, especially web application security. It would be really cool if they can integrate a SAS tool with their dynamic one."
"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."
Apiiro is ranked 21st in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 2 reviews while Invicti is ranked 15th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 25 reviews. Apiiro is rated 8.6, while Invicti is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apiiro writes "A great secrets detection feature, good visibility, and integrates well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Invicti writes "A customizable security testing solution with good tech support, but the price could be better". Apiiro is most compared with Snyk, Ox Security, Cycode, SonarQube and Semgrep Supply Chain, whereas Invicti is most compared with OWASP Zap, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Veracode. See our Apiiro vs. Invicti 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.
