What is the difference between EDR and a vulnerability scanner?

Both Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) and vulnerability scanning are essential components of a modern cybersecurity strategy, but they serve very different purposes. 

While EDR focuses on detecting and mitigating threats on endpoints as they happen, vulnerability scanners work proactively to identify potential weaknesses across systems before they’re exploited. Understanding the strengths and limitations of each helps teams make more informed decisions about how to structure their threat detection and response capabilities.

What is endpoint detection and response (EDR)?

Endpoint detection and response (EDR) refers to security solutions designed to monitor, detect, and respond to suspicious activities and threats at the endpoint level—think laptops, desktops, and servers.

EDR focus

EDR is centered around real-time endpoint protection. It continuously monitors devices for signs of compromise and provides visibility into security events, enabling faster, more effective incident response.

EDR capabilities

Detection

EDR tools leverage behavior analysis, threat intelligence, and anomaly detection to identify malicious activity such as ransomware, lateral movement, or command-and-control activity. This happens in near real-time and is often automated.

Investigation

Once a threat is detected, EDR systems collect and correlate telemetry data (process activity, registry changes, file access, etc.) to give security teams the context they need to understand the attack chain.

Response

With capabilities like automated containment, file quarantine, or remote device isolation, EDR enables teams to respond quickly and effectively, limiting damage and preventing spread across the network.

Limitations of EDR

While endpoint detection and response systems offer strong capabilities for threat detection and mitigation at the endpoint level, they have several limitations that organizations should consider when building a comprehensive security strategy.

Limited to endpoint visibility

EDR focuses on endpoints like laptops, desktops, and servers. It does not provide visibility into network traffic, web applications, APIs, or cloud environments. This means threats targeting areas outside endpoints can go undetected without complementary tools.

Reactive by nature

EDR is designed to detect and respond after malicious activity has already begun. It excels at minimizing impact and preventing lateral movement but cannot prevent the initial exploitation of a vulnerability. This reactive model makes it less effective as a standalone preventive control.

Dependence on agents

Most EDR solutions require an agent installed on each endpoint, which can create management overhead. Unmanaged, legacy, or shadow IT devices without agents are left out of the protection scope.

Detection gaps in unknown or novel attacks

Although modern EDR tools use behavioral analysis and machine learning, they still rely on known indicators or patterns. Advanced or zero-day attacks that don’t fit existing behavioral models may evade detection.

Resource consumption and performance impact

EDR agents, depending on configuration, can consume significant CPU, memory, and disk resources—especially during scans or when collecting telemetry data. This can impact endpoint performance, particularly on older systems.

Alert fatigue and complexity

EDR tools can generate large volumes of alerts, many of which may be false positives or low-priority. Without fine-tuned rules or sufficient security team capacity, this can lead to alert fatigue and slower response times.

Requires skilled analysts

Investigating and responding to EDR alerts often involves complex forensic analysis. Organizations need skilled security analysts to interpret findings, validate incidents, and take appropriate action—something that may not be feasible for smaller teams.

No inherent vulnerability management

EDR doesn’t identify or track known software vulnerabilities, which leaves a potential blind spot in proactive security posture. You still need vulnerability scanners or broader AppSec tools to find and remediate the weaknesses attackers exploit in the first place.

What is vulnerability scanning?

Vulnerability scanning is a proactive security practice that involves automated tools designed to find known vulnerabilities in systems, applications, and network configurations.

Vulnerability scanner focus

The primary goal of a vulnerability scanner is to identify and prioritize risks in software, configurations, and connected systems—before attackers can exploit them.

Vulnerability scanner capabilities

Vulnerability scanners routinely scan IT environments for:

• Outdated or unpatched software
• Misconfigurations
• Exposed services or ports
• Known CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures)

These tools don’t actively block threats—they flag weaknesses so security and IT teams can address them before they become liabilities.

Key differences and capabilities summarized

While EDR and vulnerability scanners both serve the broader goal of reducing security risk, their approaches, scope, and use cases differ significantly. Here’s a side-by-side comparison:

	EDR	Vulnerability scanner
Focus	Real-time threat detection and response on endpoints	Proactive vulnerability identification
Timing	After a threat has occurred	Before a threat can be exploited
Scope	Primarily endpoints	Wider IT infrastructure
Purpose	Protect against malware and other cyberattacks	Identify and mitigate security weaknesses

The most effective security strategies integrate both approaches—using vulnerability scanners to reduce the attack surface and EDR to quickly detect and respond when something gets through.

Why a DAST-first approach is best

In modern application security, the goal isn’t to find every theoretical risk—it’s to identify and fix the vulnerabilities that attackers can actually exploit. That’s why a DAST-first approach to vulnerability scanning is the most effective way to improve real-world security outcomes without overwhelming security or development teams.

Prioritizing real, exploitable risks

Static tools like SAST and SCA generate hundreds of alerts, but they often can’t determine if a vulnerability is actually reachable or exploitable. This creates noise and alert fatigue. In contrast, DAST (dynamic application security testing) scans live applications in runtime, surfacing only those vulnerabilities that can be triggered under real conditions. This sharpens prioritization and reduces time wasted on low-risk issues.

Faster, more efficient remediation

With solutions like Invicti, DAST becomes even more powerful through proof-based scanning, automatically confirming which vulnerabilities are exploitable and providing evidence for developers. This allows teams to skip reproduction steps and move straight to fixing what matters.

Aligns with attacker perspective

Attackers don’t read your source code—they interact with your applications from the outside in. That’s exactly how DAST works. By simulating real attack behavior, DAST delivers a more accurate and relevant view of risk than static analysis alone.

Scalable for continuous delivery

Unlike manual penetration testing or heavyweight compliance scans, DAST can be fully automated and integrated into CI/CD pipelines. This makes it ideal for securing fast-moving development environments while still delivering actionable, verified results.

Complements other tools, doesn’t replace them

DAST-first doesn’t mean DAST-only. Instead, it means starting with DAST to focus on what’s real, then layering in other tools like SAST, SCA, or IAST as needed for deeper visibility. It’s a shift from theoretical coverage to practical, measurable risk reduction.