GitHub Advanced Security vs Invicti comparison

"The most valuable is the developer experience and the extensibility of the overall ecosystem."

"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution as it can handle new applications along with the analysis part."

"Dependency scanning is a valuable feature."

"GitHub provides advanced security, which is why the customers choose this tool; it allows them to rely solely on GitHub as one platform for everything they need."

"The product's most valuable features are security scan, dependency scan, and cost-effectiveness."

"It ensures user passwords or sensitive information are not accidentally exposed in code or reports."

"I like that it's stable and technical support is great."

"The platform is stable."

"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."

"The most valuable feature of Invicti is getting baseline scanning and incremental scan."

"High level of accuracy and quick scanning."

"Crawling feature: Netsparker has very detail crawling steps and mechanisms. This feature expands the attack surface."

"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 scanner and the result generator are valuable features for us."

"The customizations are a little bit difficult."

"A more refined approach, categorizing and emphasizing specific vulnerabilities, would be beneficial."

"There could be a centralized dashboard to view reports of all the projects on one platform."

"The deployment part of the product is an area of concern that needs to be made easier from an improvement perspective."

"There could be DST features included in the product."

"The report limitations are the main issue."

"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."

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

"It would be better for listing and attacking Java-based web applications to exploit vulnerabilities."

"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."

"The solution needs to make a more specific report."

"Maybe the ability to make a good reporting format is needed."

"The custom attack preparation screen might be improved."

"The solution's false positive analysis and vulnerability analysis libraries could be improved."

"The solution is expensive."

"The current licensing model, which relies on active commitments, poses challenges, particularly in predicting and managing growth."

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

"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."

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

"The price should be 20% lower"

"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."

"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."

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

"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."