Invicti vs Seeker comparison

"It has a comprehensive resulting mechanism. It is a one-stop solution for all your security testing mechanisms."

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

"The scanner is light on the network and does not impact the network when scans are running."

"The platform is stable."

"One of the features I like about this program is the low number of false positives and the support it offers."

"Its ability to crawl a web application is quite different than another similar scanner."

"Scan, proxify the application, and then detailed report along with evidence and remediations to problems."

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

"A significant advantage of Seeker is that it is an interactive scanner, and we have found it to be much more effective in reducing the amount of false positives than dynamic scanners such as AppScan, Micro Focus Fortify, etc. Furthermore, with Seeker, we are finding more and more valid (i.e. "true") positives over time compared with the dynamic scanners."

"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."

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

"The proxy review, the use report views, the current use tool and the subset requests need some improvement. It was hard to understand how to use them."

"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective. There are URL restrictions that consume our license. Compared to other DAST solutions and task tools like WebInspect and Burp Enterprise, Invicti is very expensive. The solution’s scanning time is also very long compared to other DAST tools. It might be due to proof-based scanning."

"The higher level vulnerabilities like Cross-Site Scripting, SQL Injection, and other higher level injection attacks are difficult to highlight using Netsparker."

"Invicti's reporting capabilities need enhancement. We need enterprise-level information instead of repo-level details. Unlike Appiro, Invicti does not provide portfolio-level insights into vulnerability remediation over time."

"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"

"Invicti takes too long with big applications, and there are issues with the login portal."

"One area that Seeker can improve is to make it more customizable. All security scanning tools have a defined set of rules that are based on certain criteria which they will use to detect issues. However, the criteria that you set initially is not something that all applications are going to need."

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

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

"It is competitive in the security market."

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

"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."

"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."

"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."

"The price should be 20% lower"

"The licensing for Seeker is user-based and for 50 users I believe it costs about $70,000 per year."