Contrast Security Assess vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] comparison

Contrast Security and Keysight Technologies are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Keysight Technologies users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

1,538 Views
969 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Read 5 Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] reviews

100% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 22, 2025

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] and Contrast Security Assess compete in the cybersecurity sector with different focuses. Contrast Security Assess holds the upper hand due to its comprehensive features and vulnerability detection capabilities, enhancing its value proposition.

Features:Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] offers valuable features such as a traffic generator, the ability to check for unauthorized file transfers, and a call flow function. These features enhance its network monitoring capabilities. Contrast Security Assess provides robust application vulnerability detection, continuous monitoring, and integration with development workflows. Its IAST feature and low false positive rate are highly effective, offering comprehensive application layer protection.

Room for Improvement:Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] could improve in the areas of deployment complexity, user interface enhancement, and expanding its testing scope beyond network layers. Contrast Security Assess could enhance its commercial flexibility, expand its Protect functionality to integrate more seamlessly with existing tools, and provide more detailed step-by-step remediation guidance for developers.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service:Contrast Security Assess excels with seamless deployment, extensive integration support, and exceptional customer service. Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] requires a complex network setup, making its deployment less straightforward and potentially more burdensome for users.

Pricing and ROI:Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] is associated with lower initial setup costs, making it a traditional choice for network testing needs. In contrast, Contrast Security Assess, despite higher setup costs, delivers significant ROI through advanced features and ongoing application vulnerability protection, justifying the investment with its comprehensive security benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed Application Security Tools Report (Updated: November 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

November 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,259 peers since 2012

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

Contrast Security Assess

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (27th)

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

reviewer1605099

Director of Threat and Vulnerability Management at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications

The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of. Assess also provides the option of helping developers incorporate security elements while they're writing code. It depends on whether individual developers decide to utilize the information that's provided to them from the solution, but it definitely gives them visibility into more environments. It gives them an opportunity to remediate vulnerabilities well before production deployments.

Read full review

Jos Badimo

Director at BAMS

Test assurance improves compliance and products with good performance

The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one screen most of the time. Even if the system navigates me to another screen, it should effectively return me to the main screen.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."

"CyberFlood is flexible."

"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."

"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."

"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."

Cons

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."

"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."

"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."

"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."

"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."

"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

16%

Comms Service Provider

13%

Performing Arts

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

No data available

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?

I have been using the solution for a year now. The customers I work with are focused on both custom test assurance and test automation. The solution is utilized in the financial services sector and...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Spirent CyberFlood?

The language barrier and time difference pose significant issues with customer support. The price is competitive. The biggest benefits I find are test assurance, the reliability of the test results...

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 11% of the time

SonarQube vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

Seeker Interactive vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Ixia BreakingPoint vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 42% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 17% of the time

ERPScan SMART Cybersecurity Platform vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 10% of the time

Ixia BreakingPoint VE vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 8% of the time

Acunetix vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 7% of the time

More Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

December 2025

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

November 2025

Download Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] effectively minimizes network monitoring tasks with its impressive traffic generator and call flow function. Known for its user-friendliness, it supports network security testing and compliance across public and private clouds for large enterprises.

Users find Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] beneficial for comprehensive security evaluations, particularly in compliance and product testing. Its capabilities in generating SSL traffic assist in cybersecurity assessments, demonstrating flexibility and ease of use. The platform supports custom test assurance and automation, allowing financial and public sectors to enhance their cybersecurity measures. Despite its advantages, users desire improvements in ports, speed, multilingual support, browser accessibility, error reporting, and interface navigation.

What features does Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] offer?

Traffic Generator: Minimizes network monitoring tasks effectively.
Call Flow Function: Simplifies network processes for better management.
User-Friendliness: Enhances scheduling and usage efficiency.
Compliance Testing: Aids in product and compliance examinations.
Unauthorized File Transfer Monitoring: Ensures superior compliance performance.

What benefits should be considered in user reviews?

Flexibility: Supports diverse network security testing scenarios.
Performance: Delivers reliable compliance enforcement capabilities.
Comprehensive Testing: Addresses small to large enterprise security needs.
Enhanced Automation: Benefits public and financial sectors for test assurance.

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] is instrumental in enterprise environments within public and private sectors, offering robust network security testing and automation support. Large enterprises in financial industries utilize it to ensure cybersecurity standards, especially in cloud environments.

Keysight Technologies

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Digicel

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

November 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: November 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.