Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs Invicti comparison

"The Front Door and Service Bus are the most vital features"

"The integration with Azure Active Directory helped with the security of our applications."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the diagnostic service."

"The tool is budget-friendly."

"Has a good management feature monitored by the cloud service provider."

"The most valuable features of Azure Kubernetes Service are its integration with Kubernetes, offering similar features for a seamless experience."

"The platform's high scalability is one of its biggest advantages."

"The most valuable features of AKS are the full array of capabilities and robust security."

"Netsparker provides a more interactive interface that is more appealing."

"Invicti is a good product, and its API testing is also good."

"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."

"Invicti's proactive scanning measures vulnerabilities each time we deploy or push code to a new environment."

"Invicti is part of our SSDLC portfolio, and DAST dynamic testing is very important for our web applications and portfolios."

"The solution generates reports automatically and quickly."

"The best features of Invicti are its ability to confirm access vulnerabilities, SSL injection vulnerabilities, and its connectors to other security tools."

"I am impressed with Invictus’ proof-based scanning. The solution has reduced the incidence of false positive vulnerabilities. It has helped us reduce our time and focus on vulnerabilities."

"Configuration management and troubleshooting performance issues are difficult to solve and could be made easier."

"It can be tough to access the servers when onboarding."

"The solution is very expensive in my opinion."

"In terms of cost perspective, they could make the product more affordable."

"There are a lot of features that should be included with the AKS."

"The initial setup of AKS is complicated. The setup depends on the cluster, nodes, and lots of other things. There are also lots of extremely critical small devices. Moreover, you will have to pay them even while setting up the solution. It is not like you setup first and then pay for it."

"I would like to see Azure implement something like the K9 terminal for interacting with Kubernetes clusters. It's a user-friendly CLI interface."

"The solution's logs have room for improvement."

"Asset scanning could be better. Once, it couldn't scan assets, and the issue was strange. The price doesn't fit the budget of small and medium-sized businesses."

"The scanning time, complexity, and authentication features of Invicti could be improved."

"The scannings are not sufficiently updated."

"Netsparker doesn't provide the source code of the static application security testing."

"The scanner itself should be improved because it is a little bit slow."

"Currently, there is nothing I would like to improve."

"They need to improve their support in the documentation. Their support mechanism is missing. Their responsiveness, technical staff, and these types of things need to be improved, and comprehensive documentation is required. They should have good self-service portal enhancement"

"Right now, they are missing the static application security part, especially web application security."

"We could spend as little as $25 or $30 a month on Kubernetes Services, compared to the typical $100 a month expenditure for a virtual machine."

"Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is an expensive solution"

"As you scale your operations, AKS becomes more cost-effective."

"The price of AKS is expensive. We pay approximately $10,000 monthly."

"The product is expensive."

"Azure Kubernetes Service offers a pay-as-you-go licensing model."

"The pricing of the solution is dependent on the choice of virtual machines, specifically the amount of memory required. There are various options available, ranging from around twenty-five to even more choices to select from. This flexibility allows you to customize the pricing based on your specific needs. From my perspective, virtual machines in the cloud tend to be slightly more expensive compared to virtual machines offered directly by data centers. However, this cost is offset by the benefits of a managed service. Taking the overall picture into account, the managed service approach is advantageous. The pricing for the platform can vary, typically ranging from three hundred euros per month to two thousand euros per month, depending on the specific requirements and setup you choose."

"It is a cost-effective solution."

"Netsparker is one of the costliest products in the market. It would help if they could allow us to scan multiple URLs on the same license."

"We never had any issues with the licensing; the price was within our assigned limits."

"Invicti is best suited for large enterprises. I don't think small and medium-sized businesses can afford it. Maintenance costs aren't that great."

"It is competitive in the security market."

"We are using an NFR license and I do not know the exact price of the NFR license. I think 20 FQDN for three years would cost around 35,000 US Dollars."

"I think that price it too high, like other Security applications such as Acunetix, WebInspect, and so on."

"OWASP Zap is free and it has live updates, so that's a big plus."

"The solution is very expensive. It comes with a yearly subscription. We were paying 6000 dollars yearly for unlimited scans. We have three licenses; basic, business, and ultimate. We need ultimate because it has unlimited scan numbers."