Vulnerability scanning and penetration testing are both essential for application security but serve distinct purposes: where automated scans provide broad and continuous coverage, pentests offer deep, exploit-driven insights. This post explains how a DAST-first approach bridges the gap by validating real risks and enhancing both methods.
When it comes to securing applications, two techniques often get mentioned together: vulnerability scanning and penetration testing. While both are critical components of a security strategy, they serve different purposes and each offers unique value. Understanding the difference is essential for building a proactive and efficient AppSec program.
Vulnerability scanning is an automated process that identifies known security weaknesses in applications, APIs, or systems. These tools typically scan for outdated software versions, misconfigurations, missing patches, and vulnerabilities in code or architecture. Dynamic application security testing (DAST) tools are a key category of vulnerability scanners, focused on testing the behavior of live, running applications.
Automated scanners offer scalability and continuous coverage, making them ideal for DevSecOps pipelines and agile environments. With modern tools like Invicti, vulnerability scanning can go beyond simple discovery, automatically validating issues to reduce false positives and helping teams prioritize real risk.
Vulnerability scanning tools are automated solutions designed to detect known security weaknesses in systems, networks, and applications. Most of these tools compare a target environment against a continuously updated database of known vulnerabilities, such as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), but DAST scanners also perform active security checks to identify previously unknown vulnerabilities in running applications.
Invicti (formerly Netsparker) and Acunetix stand out as the most effective and reliable solutions for web application and API security. Both are part of the Invicti Security family, combining deep technical expertise with industry-leading innovation to deliver results that go beyond basic scanning:
The cost of vulnerability scanning varies widely depending on the delivery model, licensing structure, and operational complexity.
External scanning services may be convenient for one-off or infrequent engagements but can quickly become costly and inefficient with more regular use, especially if the provider is simply running a tool you could just as well deploy in-house. You’re effectively paying a premium to outsource tasks your team could automate and control internally. With a reliable and accurate in-house tool, you gain continuous access, faster turnaround, and the ability to integrate scanning into your workflows—all without recurring service fees or external delays.
Licensing models can dramatically impact the total cost of commercial security tools. Traditional vendors often impose restrictive licensing with per-engine or per-environment charges that quickly multiply your expenses. Invicti breaks this paradigm by delivering unrestricted access to scan your entire application portfolio without arbitrary limitations. Unlike legacy platforms that bottleneck your security operations with concurrent scan caps, Invicti's transparent licensing empowers unlimited simultaneous scans, eliminating delays and redundant costs. This approach is ideal for modern DevSecOps workflows where security must keep pace with rapid innovation.
Cheap or open-source tools might seem attractive during budget reviews but can become expensive if they generate excessive false positives and other noise. Time spent triaging non-issues adds up quickly. Invicti’s proof-based scanning minimizes this by confirming exploitable vulnerabilities automatically to reduce noise and streamline remediation.
Ultimately, the real cost of scanning is the effort required to act on results. Tools that deliver accurate, actionable insights offer the best long-term value.
Vulnerability scanning offers several strategic and operational advantages that make it a key part of any layered security program:
The effectiveness of vulnerability scanning depends heavily on the capabilities of the tool in use. Some limitations are inherent to automated scanning in general, while others can be addressed with advanced solutions like Invicti:
While no scanner can find everything, the right tool can push past many traditional limitations—delivering accurate, in-depth results that are ready for immediate remediation.
Penetration testing is a manual or semi-automated process in which ethical hackers simulate real-world attacks to uncover security flaws in systems, applications, APIs, or networks. Compared to vulnerability scanning, penetration testing is more exploit-focused and designed to assess how vulnerabilities could be leveraged in an actual attack scenario.
Penetration testing is typically more in-depth and tailored to the organization’s environment, making it valuable for understanding real risk exposure beyond what scanners can detect.
While the penetration testing process is largely manual, pentesters use a wide range of specialized tools to accelerate testing or probe deeper into specific vulnerabilities. Common tools include:
Notably, pentesting also involves the use of vulnerability scanners for reconnaissance and testing. Apart from the open-source ZAP, two commercial tools are especially favored by many penetration testers, namely Burp Suite by Portswigger (for extensibility and payload customization) and Acunetix by Invicti (for speed and accuracy in reconnaissance).
The cost of a penetration test can vary significantly based on:
Typical costs range from $4,000 to $25,000 or more, depending on the factors above. For enterprise environments or regulatory compliance (e.g. PCI DSS), costs can far exceed that range.
Penetration testing provides several essential benefits:
Limitations of a penetration test
While a valuable and mandatory part of any cybersecurity program, penetration testing has its limitations and should always complement, not replace, continuous security monitoring and scanning:
Penetration testingVulnerability scanningPurposeSimulates real-world attacks to exploit any weaknessesIdentifies and reports vulnerabilities automaticallyDepthDeep and manual exploration of systemsBroad and automated surface-level scanningApproachHuman-led (manual or semi-automated)Fully automatedSkill requirementRequires skilled ethical hackersOperated by security analysts or triggered automaticallyTesting frequencyUsually periodic (quarterly or annual)Continuous or scheduled (up to daily or weekly)OutputDetailed report with exploited paths and risk insightsList of vulnerabilities with severity ratingsContext awarenessHigh. Testers can understand business logic and app workflowsLow. Scanning based on known patterns and app behaviorsTime & costTime-intensive and higher costFaster and more cost-effectiveRisk validationConfirms actual risk by performing realistic attacksFlags potential issues, often without validation (except for tools with automated confirmation)Use casesCompliance, red teaming, high-risk environmentsOngoing security hygiene and baseline assessment
While vulnerability scanning and penetration testing each bring value to security programs, a DAST-first strategy, as championed by Invicti, elevates their effectiveness by aligning testing efforts with real, exploitable risk. DAST on the Invicti Application Security Platform works by safely simulating attacks against live applications, similar to a real attacker—or a pentester. It focuses not on theoretical flaws in code but on actual exploitable vulnerabilities in the running software.
With capabilities like proof-based scanning, Invicti validates vulnerabilities automatically, confirming whether they are truly exploitable. This eliminates noise from false positives, which are common in static tools and basic scanners, and gives developers the clarity they need to fix what matters most.
Here’s how operating DAST-first enhances your broader security efforts:
Crucially, a DAST-first strategy doesn’t replace pentesting or other tools but rather makes them more strategic. Pentesters can focus on advanced scenarios and business logic abuse, while vulnerability scans run in the background to monitor for common vulnerabilities as part of daily security hygiene.Â
Ultimately, putting DAST at the core of your AppSec program helps ensure that your security efforts are grounded in reality to catch what attackers can actually exploit—and grab the low-hanging vulnerabilities yourself without having to pay pentesters for them.