We performed a comparison between PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Seeker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."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."
"This tool is more accurate than the other solutions that we use, and reports fewer false positives."
"The initial setup is simple."
"The most valuable feature is Burp Collaborator."
"You can download different plugins if you don't have them in the standard edition."
"The solution is stable."
"Some of the extensions, available using Burp Extender, are also very good and we have found issues by using them."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the dashboard. It is very informative and you can receive all the information you need in one place. It's clear, well-defined, and organized. Anybody without any cybersecurity can use it."
"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."
"The technical support team's response time is mostly delayed and should be improved."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"You can have many false positives in Burp Suite. It depends on the scale of the penetration testing."
"If your application uses multi-factor authentication, registration management cannot be automated."
"The number of false positives need to be reduced on the solution."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"I would like to see the return of the spider mechanism instead of the crawling feature. Burp Suite's earlier version 1.7 had an excellent spider option, and it would be beneficial if Burp incorporated those features into the current version. The crawling techniques used in the current version are not as efficient as those used in earlier versions."
"The Burp Collaborator needs improvement. There also needs to be improved integration."
"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."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 5th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 57 reviews while Seeker is ranked 24th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 1 review. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6, while Seeker is rated 7.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Seeker writes "More effective than dynamic scanners, but is missing useful learning capabilities". PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with OWASP Zap, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan and Qualys Web Application Scanning, whereas Seeker is most compared with Synopsys API Security Testing, Coverity, Contrast Security Assess and SonarQube.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.