Skip to main content
0-Doubt
NewsInvestorsQuestionnairesDeveloperHelp
AnonymousSign in
0-Doubt — neutral IT/Security research
BrowseResellersCertified analystsRFI/RFP questionnairesHow trust worksHelp & FAQAPI
  1. Home/
  2. Acunetix

Acunetix

enriched
API SecurityApplication Security (ASPM)

acunetix.com ↗ · required email domain for this vendor's users

Do you work at Acunetix?

This profile was built from public sources and hasn't been claimed yet. Claiming it lets you correct what's wrong and add details only you can confirm — and marks that information as vendor-verified for buyers.

Free, and it does not affect ranking, placement, or comparison results. The first person verified on Acunetix's email domain becomes the profile admin.

Claim this profileAlready have an account?

Trust profileHow to read thisFive separate questions a buyer actually asks, each answered with its own evidence and a link to the source. There is deliberately no overall score: a single number invites comparison it cannot support, and would mostly reflect how much of Acunetix we have managed to scan rather than anything about the vendor.

Not checked means we have not looked yet, and is never counted against a vendor. Limited means we did look, but found only one line of evidence — enough to report, not enough to corroborate.

checked 9 of 16 signals
  • Limited

    Independently verified

    Has anyone other than the vendor confirmed this?

    checked 3 of 4

    Nothing here has been confirmed by an independent third party yet.

    • No third-party certifications found
    • Profile not claimed by the vendor
  • Limited

    Operating durability

    Is this a real, durable business?

    checked 3 of 4

    How long this vendor has been operating, and who stands behind them.

    • Domain registered 2004 — 21 years ago
    • Headquarters location not disclosed on their site
  • Mixed

    Behaviour under stress

    What do they do when something goes wrong?

    checked 2 of 3

    What their public record shows about handling vulnerabilities and outages.

    • 6 published CVE(s) — a public disclosure record exists
    • 1 rated critical
    • No public status page found
  • Limited

    Disclosure posture

    Do they tell you the awkward things unprompted?

    checked 1 of 3

    How much this vendor volunteers before you have to ask.

    • No trust center found
  • Not checked

    Momentum

    Are they still shipping, or coasting?

    checked 0 of 2

    We have not tracked this vendor's release activity yet.

    Nothing checked here yet — this is not a mark against Acunetix.

Data coverage: 13/100What this measures (and doesn't)

Not a quality rating or endorsement — a measure of how much verified, disclosed data we actually have about this vendor. A low score usually means "we don't have much verified information yet," not "this is a bad vendor." Never used to sort or rank vendor lists.

Verification depth0/100
Security signal0/100
Buyer feedbackno data yet (0 reviews so far)
Profile completeness13/100
claim · HQ · materials · screenshots · integrations · certifications · security check

The platform admin controls the formula's weights.

Data coverage profileHow to read thisThe same four components behind the data coverage score above, shaped instead of listed — a vendor strong on verification but thin on buyer feedback looks visibly different from one that's the other way around. Security and feedback plot at the neutral midpoint (50) when there's no data yet (no products tracked, no reviews), matching how the actual score itself treats missing data — not a guess either way.

VerificationSecurityFeedbackCompletenessThis vendor — Verification: 0This vendor — Security: 0This vendor — Feedback: no data yetThis vendor — Completeness: 13

IntegrationsUI-12 — integration graphDetected from this vendor's own published integration/partner pages by the enrichment loop — each entry links the exact page it was found on. Directional: "integrates with" is claimed by this vendor; "integrated by" is claimed by the other vendor's site. Coverage grows as the scan progresses.

8 detected

Integrated by: Black Duck, Intruder, Nucleus Security, OctoXLabs, Phoenix Security, PlexTrac, Seemplicity, Strobes Security

Buyer reviewsUI-14 — verified-buyer reviewsWritten only by domain-verified buyers at other companies, attributed to their company domain (never their identity), and moderated. Buyer-sourced opinion, clearly separate from the neutral catalog facts above — and never an input to search or comparison ordering.

verified buyers only

No buyer reviews yet.

Reputation ratingUI-20 — anonymous ratingA single anonymous 5-star signal from buyers, resellers, and analysts who've engaged with this vendor — separate from the domain-attributed reviews above. No rater identity is ever shown, not even at company level.

anonymous

No ratings in this window yet.

External ratingsUI-22 — third-party ratingsAggregate rating and review count pulled directly from the source site's own published data — never the review text itself, which belongs to that site. Links go to the real page so you can read the actual reviews there.

via third-party review sites
PeerSpot: 3.9/5 (36 reviews) ↗

API vulnerability scanning and testing for REST, SOAP, and GraphQL APIs AI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →

Security & trust signalsAbout these signalsCertifications are keyword-matched from the vendor's own public pages (each claim links to its source — verify directly before relying on it). Security headers are checked live against the vendor's homepage, re-checked every 90 days. Both are independent, automated signals, not a vendor-submitted or audited claim, and are not blended into a single score.

6 of 9 technical checks completed — not a score, just coverage

Infrastructure & transparency signals

Domain since 2004

CVE severity over timeUI-24 — CVE severity timelineEvery known CVE with a disclosure date and severity, plotted by when it was published — lets you see whether disclosures are trending toward more or less severe, not just a raw count. Same NVD-sourced, name-matched data as the list below.

LOWMEDIUMHIGHCRITICAL200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022CVE-2022-29315 · HIGH 8.8 · 2022-04-19CVE-2017-11674 · MEDIUM 5.5 · 2017-07-27CVE-2017-11673 · CRITICAL 9.8 · 2017-07-27CVE-2015-4027 · HIGH 7.2 · 2015-12-18CVE-2014-2994 · HIGH 10.0 · 2014-04-27CVE-2007-0120 · LOW 1.9 · 2007-01-09

Known CVEs (6)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. This is a name-based match, not exact version tracking — always check the linked NVD record for affected versions before drawing conclusions. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score.

RSS ⇢
  • CVE-2022-29315 ↗HIGH 8.82022

    Invicti Acunetix before 14 allows CSV injection via the Description field on the Add Targets page, if the Export CSV feature is used.

  • CVE-2017-11674 ↗MEDIUM 5.52017

    Reporter.exe in Acunetix 8 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a malformed PRE file, related to a "Read Access Violation starting at reporter!madTraceProcess."

  • CVE-2017-11673 ↗CRITICAL 9.82017

    Reporter.exe in Acunetix 8 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (application crash) via a malformed PRE file, related to a "User Mode Write AV starting at rep…

  • CVE-2015-4027 ↗HIGH 7.22015

    The AcuWVSSchedulerv10 service in Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner (WVS) before 10 build 20151125 allows local users to gain privileges via a command parameter in the reporttemplate property in a pa…

  • CVE-2014-2994 ↗HIGH 10.02014

    Stack-based buffer overflow in Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner (WVS) 8 build 20120704 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an HTML file containing an IMG element with a long URL (s…

  • CVE-2007-0120 ↗LOW 1.92007

    Acunetix Web Vulnerability Scanner (WVS) 4.0 Build 20060717 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via multiple HTTP requests containing invalid Content-L…

Competitors (12)

full alternatives comparison →
42CrunchAdaCoreaDolus TechnologyCloudMatosData TheoremEdgescanEscapeIndusfaceInvictiMendPrancer EnterpriseStackHawk

Products (2)

API Security

1
  • Acunetix API Security TestingAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    API vulnerability scanning and testing for REST, SOAP, and GraphQL APIs

Application Security (ASPM)

1
  • Acunetix Web Application & API SecurityAI-generated from public sourcesAuto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials. Not verified by the vendor or an analyst. Check the freshness indicator.Lowest independence — unverified. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →source ↗
    DAST scanner for web apps & APIs with automated vuln detection & remediation