External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Most of the customers who use Acunetix are looking for security testing. The primary use case is performing penetration testing.
The main use cases include vulnerability scanning, security testing, penetration testing, PCI DSS reporting, and multi-user environment support, which excels in SQL injection and cross-site scripting detection.
Acunetix has a very good ratio of fewer false positives, so users don't need to retest everything.
Acunetix operates smoothly with no interruptions required, and it performs at 100% efficiency without issues in scanning anything.
The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities.
Acunetix integrates with every type of tool, including CI/CD tools, offering 100% integration in DevOps environments.
The main benefit of Acunetix is that at the first level, users can address security issues related to penetration testing, allowing them to expose vulnerabilities and ensure all required testing is completed with very few false positives.
Acunetix should improve by further reducing false positives and providing more customized reports, plus better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps.
I have been working with Acunetix for almost seven to eight years.
The setup is straightforward, with nothing difficult in Acunetix.
Acunetix is a stable solution.
For scalability, Acunetix easily scales for larger environments and larger systems.
Invectis Support provides good service when contacted.
Positive
I have more experience with IBM products, specifically IBM QRadar.
The deployment, installation, and training take approximately two to three days.
Every second customer sees ROI with Acunetix.
Acunetix supports multi-user environments effectively.
Acunetix is targeted for small to mid-size teams in a DevSecOps environment, making it the best choice for small and mid-size companies, offering a friendly interface, support for CI/CD, and excellent vulnerability scanning capabilities.
On a scale of 1 to 10, I rate Acunetix 9 out of 10.
Positive
I use Acunetix for penetration testing purposes. This is the primary use case.
I mainly configure the tool for web applications, and I evaluate all products on the market. I find it to be one of the most comprehensive tools, with support for manual intervention. It offers support for specific scenarios like CAPTCHA and supports the ability to manage actions and updates from the internet.
I have experienced some problems yet can't recall the details. There was an issue related to updates from the internet, however, the support program was helpful in addressing it.
I am an ongoing customer.
The solution is generally stable, however, there might be room for improvement regarding glitches or bugs.
I don't fully understand the scalability features. Overall, it is adequate for our use case.
The technical support from Invicti is very good and fast. I am highly satisfied with the response time and quality of support.
Positive
I use Invicti for application security testing.
One person is enough for the installation.
The tool is helpful for us. It saves a significant amount of time by covering attack surfaces.
We secured a special licensing model for penetration testing companies, which is cost-effective.
I can see Burp Suite as an alternative.
I rate the overall solution nine out of ten. I prefer Acunetix for its more precise and accurate results.
The primary use is mainly related to vulnerability assessment, including both public and internal IP addresses.
By using this tool, we have reduced the workload and increased the productivity of users.
It generates automated reports. This feature is beneficial when sharing reports with clients as it works as a unique selling point due to how attractive and descriptive the reports are.
The interface API and other functionalities are very good. However, the cost can be reduced as management has noted it to be on the higher side.
I have been working with Acunetix for almost two years.
The technical support provided by Acunetix is absolutely great. We received support from them at every point in time.
Positive
I used Nessus in one of my previous organizations due to cost reasons. However, my current organization decided to go with Acunetix.
The initial setup was easy because we had a proper software team consisting of developers, database administrators, and application teams. With the help of the vendor, we were able to implement it successfully. It took approximately three to four months.
The implementation was carried out with the help of a consultant.
The cost is being handled by the procurement team, yet it is on the higher side, and there is a recommendation to reduce it.
I would generally recommend Acunetix to any organization in the IT-enabled sector. However, I have not worked for a non-IT organization, so I cannot comment on that.
I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.
We are a consultant company.
Just by scanning, Acunetix provides proof of exploit and gives the specific code affected. You can also see a categorized list of vulnerabilities. From there, you can easily create a report.
It integrates with multiple tools in the CI/CD pipeline, like Jira and web application firewalls.
Acunetix automation improved our customer's security testing process. By integrating with CI/CD tools, it enables a shift-left approach in the development process. This helps find vulnerabilities earlier rather than after the application is published.
The interactive transaction feature is a winning point for us. It's a great selling point. Also, the ability to provide an inventory of currently used APIs is very helpful.
There is room for improvement in the pricing.
Tenable is better integrated and offers many tools in a bundle. I would like to see the same thing in Acunetix. Otherwise, I'm satisfied with Acunetix's performance.
I have been using it for three years.
We propose this product for smaller or bigger businesses.
But mostly to bigger enterprises. It's because of the reputation it has with bigger companies.
Acunetix provides good support. No complaints.
Positive
Acunetix stands out with its metrics, features, and Proof of Exploit. Other solutions we've used don't have those.
There is also Tenable.io Web App Scanning. Tenable's advantage is how it handles vulnerability management. For example, if you have Ansible vulnerability management, you can see both sets of information in a single pane. The only other difference might be pricing, but I'm not entirely sure about that.
The initial setup is straightforward. Considering everything is in place, it will take about two weeks.
We usually help our customers implement the product.
The price is reasonable. We don't have many complaints from customers.
I would recommend Acunetix to others for their web vulnerability scanning needs.
Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten.
The product is really easy to use. It is a useful product. If you are a security engineer and don't have experience in the tool, you can learn it quickly. We are using Acunetix on our XDR process. We use it to scan applications and create reports for the developers. We use the scheduler to schedule scans. We can use a scan simulation to see whether the connection is established correctly. We can see where the issue is. It is great because we can find the bugs. We can create authenticated scans.
The deployment process must be improved. It is difficult to create a proxy connection.
I have been using the solution for five years.
The support is not perfect. The support could be improved. I often have to write to managers to push things.
Neutral
I work with on-premise and on-the-cloud products. I faced a huge problem when I tried to install cloud agents. We needed a proxy connection, but Acunetix had a problem creating the connection. I worked with the support for a month. It started working, but the agent caused the bug.
I have used Snyk, Qualys, and Tenable. I have worked with other tools that are more helpful and have more functionality than Acunetix. Acunetix is suitable for small companies.
We use Acunetix via API with our bucket. When developers try to push some part of the code, Acunetix is used to analyze the vulnerabilities. The integration of Acunetix with Jira and other buckets is easy. Acunetix is not very different from the other vulnerability scanners. It is not the best solution. The connection is via API. We get the link and change the token between the connections. The integration is not easy, but it's not hard. Bigger companies with a lot of developers can get better tools. Overall, I rate the tool a six or seven out of ten.
We use the solution for web application testing.
The solution identify security risks.
There could be extensions that help us perform test cases related to AI bots or element-based testing. Implementing such extensions internally could be beneficial for enhancing the testing capabilities.
Sometimes it takes too much time to complete, maybe because the application is huge or we have not properly configured the scan settings. Due to these challenges, the scan often stops in between.
I have been using Acunetix for seven years.
The product is stable.
I rate the solution’s stability a ten out of ten.
The scalability depends on the license that we avail. I rate the solution’s scalability a nine or ten out of ten.
Customer support is helpful, but sometimes the response are a bit delayed. They respond within 24 hours.
Positive
The initial setup is straightforward and takes an hour to complete.
The product pricing is average.
I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
I recommend the solution as we didn't have some specific extensions for any failure testing and SSO related testing.
Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.