We performed a comparison between Parasoft SOAtest and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Generating new messages, based on the existing .EDN and .XML messages, is a crucial part or the testing project that I’m currently in."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"The solution is scalable."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Every imaginable source in the entire world of information technology can be accessed and used."
"We are mostly using it for scanning the entire website. So, we basically create a script with the entire website and then run it for different injections."
"The intercepting feature is the most valuable."
"It was easy to learn."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite does not hamper the node of the server, and it does not shut down the server if it is running."
"You can scan any number of applications and it updates its database."
"The solution has a great user interface."
"With the Extender Tab, if you know how to code then you can create a plugin and add it to Burp."
"Enables automation of different tasks such as authorization testing."
"UI testing should be more in-depth."
"Reports could be customized and more descriptive according to the user's or company's requirements."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"From an automation point of view, it should have better clarity and be more user friendly."
"During the process of working with SOAtest and building test cases, the .TST files will grow. A negative side effect is that saving your changes takes more time."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The solution doesn't offer very good scalability."
"We'd like to have more integration potential across all versions of the product."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
"One thing that is not up to the mark in PortSwigger is web application testing. I found some issues with its performance and reporting. They should work on these and give us a better outcome."
"The tool is very expensive."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"As with most automated security tools, too many false positives."
"The Auto Scanning features should be updated more frequently and should include the latest attack vectors."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 28th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 30 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 5th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 55 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our Parasoft SOAtest vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.