ImmuniWeb vs Ixia BreakingPoint comparison

"After the assessment, you clearly know which assets require penetration testing."

"The most valuable features are the SLA of Zero false-positives, less time of service development, validation of unlimited patched vulnerabilities, and several others."

"ImmuniWeb boasts a robust vulnerability detection mechanism, formidable threat mitigation, and an efficient remediation process, incorporating automation techniques and ALM strategies. The solution is highly stable. The solution is scalable. Editing Key Points for Review "Review about ImmuniWeb" What is our primary use case? We use the solution when we face challenges and urgent attention is needed for complex cases from our clients. To address this, we collaborate with the middleware, internal, and client teams to analyze and sort through intricate logs concerning our business cybersecurity program. How has it helped my organization? The solution helped us with one of our clients in the New York area contacted us about a data breach. In response, we swiftly organized a case meeting involving our client, internal, and email customer support teams. Together, we conducted an incident response, facilitating offline assistance for proper planning and risk management processes. We delved into the details of the data breach, identified how it occurred, and collaborated to rectify the issue. The client expressed satisfaction with the resolution process. What is most valuable? ImmuniWeb boasts a robust vulnerability detection mechanism, formidable threat mitigation, and an efficient remediation process, incorporating automation techniques and ALM strategies. It also focuses on consumer satisfaction and operates in English-speaking markets, primarily required by the UAE, the United States, Canada, and Australia, among other developed countries. For how long have I used the solution? We have been using this product for the past one and half years. What do I think about the stability of the solution? The solution is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten. What do I think about the scalability of the solution? The solution is scalable. I rate it a nine out of ten. How are customer service and support? Support is generally excellent"

"ImmuniWeb is stable."

"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."

"I like the fully automated continuous discovery run by ImmuniWeb in the background. We do not need to rerun the same tests or the same scanning against our resources. We need to supply our IP addresses, domain names, and significant resources with special domain names and URLs, and we need to do it only once. Then we always have an up-to-date picture. I also like the integration with our single sign-on system. We do not need to maintain a separate set of usernames or user accounts. We can plug this ImmuniWeb service into our authentication technology, enabling two-factor authentication. We have secure authentication right out of the box. The other important feature I like is the executive view. You can easily switch from a technical view to an executive view and have a helicopter view of the compliance status. We can see how much effort is required and our current status."

"The initial setup process is user-friendly."

"It is a scalable solution."

"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."

"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."

"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."

"I like that we can test cloud applications."

"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."

"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."

"It would be better if they had an automated tagging feature. The tagging functionality currently requires manual tagging, and that's probably the most needed feature from my standpoint. We also do not have enough tools, enough features, or options to display different resources in the way we need. There are basic grouping and some filtering features, but we still cannot fully separate some flavors of our resources. However, we may not be aware of the latest features."

"A great idea would be to support using Discovery on the internal network, allowing delivery of all the features of the current Discovery to internal network resources."

"The deployment process on the cloud is straightforward, while on-premise can be complex. Support is generally excellent, although there can be delays in ticket resolution."

"Its technical support could be better."

"A great idea would be to make a mobile application for the ImmuniWeb portal so that all information would be available on the go and from a mobile phone as well. It would be much more convenient."

"ImmuniWeb sometimes shows previous scans instead of running tests."

"The product’s interface for the web applications could be similar to Android and iOS versions."

"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."

"The price could be better."

"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."

"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."

"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."

"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."

"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."

"ImmuniWeb is relatively cheap. It's a competitive price compared to other products in the marketplace. It's worth the money we are paying for it."

"The values of ImmuniWeb are currently significantly below what is valued in the Chilean market for these services and solutions."

"It is pretty expensive."

"There should be the flexibility to change or add pricing, especially for pay-per-use cases."

"The platform is expensive if a large development is involved. However, it is less expensive for scheduled-based testing, quarterly or in a year."

"It is pretty expensive."

"I use the product's free version. The tool costs around 229 dollars."

"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."

"The price of the solution is expensive."

"The price is high. We pay for the license monthly."

"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."

"The solution is expensive."

"There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that."