"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."
"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."
"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting, which provides a good level of detail with respect to vulnerabilities."
"The most effective feature of the product is the ability to scan the entire environment."
"The solution's instant reports feature is the most effective for detecting threats."
"The solution is stable."
"It is fully automated."
"We use the tool for our websites. We have a vulnerable subdomain. The tool helps to scan it for vulnerabilities."
"We can get detailed information about vulnerabilities."
"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."
"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."
"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."
"The report customization needs to be better."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning conducts a general scan, which wastes time. The scan needs to be specific."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is not very user-friendly and you need a lot of information to get proper reports. The tool's support is not very responsive."
"They have a general dashboard for web application scanning, but the dashboards and reporting can be improved. They probably have some features in their roadmap."
"It isn't easy to manage vulnerabilities in Tenable."
"The cloud and the on-premises versions have their own controllers, and there is no way to centrally manage controllers."
"I would like for them to add proxy filtering, where you can transfer and alter the package. It is fully automated. Other web application testers programs are actually proxy software, and the proxy software gives you the flexibility of modifying the outgoing package, which will actually help you in exploiting any vulnerability in detail."
"Tenable.io Web Application Scanning could improve by offering faster fuzzing."
More Tenable.io Web Application Scanning Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Synopsys Defensics is ranked 5th in Fuzz Testing Tools while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is ranked 24th in Application Security Tools with 14 reviews. Synopsys Defensics is rated 8.6, while Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Synopsys Defensics writes "Technical support provided protocol-specific documentation to prove that some positives were not false". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable.io Web Application Scanning writes "Highly Recommended Solution with Latest Scanning Methods". Synopsys Defensics is most compared with Snyk, SonarQube, Fortify on Demand, Invicti and HCL AppScan, whereas Tenable.io Web Application Scanning is most compared with Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Fortify on Demand, SonarQube and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional.
We monitor all Fuzz Testing 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.