PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Reviews

We use the product primarily for application security. It helps us conduct scans and perform manual testing.

The platform's most valuable feature is the scanner. It also includes highly beneficial tools like the repeater and decoder. One useful function is the ability to send requests to the repeater without making actual requests through the browser, allowing me to modify requests easily. Additionally, the availability of various extensions, such as SQLite, adds to its value.

One area for improvement is the integrated browser, Chromium. Single Sign-On (SSO) methods like Microsoft authentication login sometimes fail and show errors. As a workaround, I have to use a different browser, such as Firefox, to log in and make Burp work.

I suggest adding a static code analysis feature to Burp. A plugin developers could install in their Integrated Development Environments (IDEs), like Visual Studio, would be incredibly useful. It would allow developers to perform code scanning as they write code.

I have been working with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional for almost ten years.

I rate the product stability an eight out of ten. 

There are approximately 10 to 15 users in my department or company using Burp. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

The technical support team resolved my issue, though it was not immediate. Since this experience was years ago, I haven't raised any support tickets recently.

Positive

One free tool that I consider a good competitor to Burp is OWASP ZAP.

While ZAP has the advantage of being open-source and cost-free, I would choose Burp for penetration testing. Burp is the best for this purpose, although ZAP is adequate for basic tasks, especially in companies where Burp Suite Professional is unavailable.

The initial setup is simple. We use the desktop version, with the application installed on our local machines.

The platform's pricing is reasonable. It is not very high, especially compared to other tools like Acunetix or Fortify, which are quite expensive.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it a nine out of ten.