I believe a learning path should be added to help users maximize the potential of StackHawk. While the tool is powerful and intuitive, a structured learning path will provide step-by-step guidance on configuring scans, interpreting results, and implementing security best practices. StackHawk needs more reporting capabilities and more dashboard views to showcase the progress of vulnerabilities remediation. Additionally, some customization of scan policies will be neat, as the current way to apply policies for scans is very manual. StackHawk is a strong solution, but improved reporting, easier integration, and more AI-driven recommendations would make it even more effective. Overall, I am highly satisfied with its capabilities and continued improvement.
StackHawk can be improved in the way that it is integrated, as at the very beginning, the idea was to, within the pipeline, mount the different resources that our microservices needed to start to run. For example, if we have a service that needed Redis, maybe Kafka, or a database to initialize, we did need to have a Docker Compose file, get up those services, and after that, do the analysis. It didn't have that; it wasn't reachable at the very beginning and it wasn't that good as we expected. But at some point, we decided to mount it as an agent in the Docker file, and it was waiting for new jobs. It was even better, and when we figured out how to integrate it within our EKS cluster, suddenly we started reaching to the services, knowing what was going on, and everything related to security. As long as we have a P2T to our QA site or cluster, we do not have garbage in our databases, but StackHawk does put a little information, a garbage information, doing their job. That's the main area I'm focusing on right now regarding needed improvements.
Manager Sec Ops at a real estate/law firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Jan 14, 2026
I cannot think of anything I would add to StackHawk, with the possible exception of adding any additional code bases that might be out there. I am thinking about a situation where a company might be in mergers and acquisitions mode and they onboard a company that has developed an application in a code base that is not covered by StackHawk, which would introduce some inefficiency and possible compliance difficulties. It would be great if StackHawk were continuously adding more and more languages and integrations. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate StackHawk an eight, only because I wish the product was a little less expensive. It also is running into direct competition with Snyk, as they did an acquisition of another DAST company, and they should be sensitive to that and possibly offer a discount for current users because it would be under consideration to move to Snyk and reduce complexity even if it was by a little bit.
StackHawk provides a dynamic application security testing tool designed to identify and fix vulnerabilities in modern CI/CD workflows quickly. It seamlessly integrates into developers' pipelines to deliver real-time feedback, helping teams prioritize and address application security efficiently.Known for its developer-first approach, StackHawk empowers teams to conduct proactive security testing at every stage of the software development lifecycle. It offers robust scanning capabilities that...
I believe a learning path should be added to help users maximize the potential of StackHawk. While the tool is powerful and intuitive, a structured learning path will provide step-by-step guidance on configuring scans, interpreting results, and implementing security best practices. StackHawk needs more reporting capabilities and more dashboard views to showcase the progress of vulnerabilities remediation. Additionally, some customization of scan policies will be neat, as the current way to apply policies for scans is very manual. StackHawk is a strong solution, but improved reporting, easier integration, and more AI-driven recommendations would make it even more effective. Overall, I am highly satisfied with its capabilities and continued improvement.
StackHawk can be improved in the way that it is integrated, as at the very beginning, the idea was to, within the pipeline, mount the different resources that our microservices needed to start to run. For example, if we have a service that needed Redis, maybe Kafka, or a database to initialize, we did need to have a Docker Compose file, get up those services, and after that, do the analysis. It didn't have that; it wasn't reachable at the very beginning and it wasn't that good as we expected. But at some point, we decided to mount it as an agent in the Docker file, and it was waiting for new jobs. It was even better, and when we figured out how to integrate it within our EKS cluster, suddenly we started reaching to the services, knowing what was going on, and everything related to security. As long as we have a P2T to our QA site or cluster, we do not have garbage in our databases, but StackHawk does put a little information, a garbage information, doing their job. That's the main area I'm focusing on right now regarding needed improvements.
I cannot think of anything I would add to StackHawk, with the possible exception of adding any additional code bases that might be out there. I am thinking about a situation where a company might be in mergers and acquisitions mode and they onboard a company that has developed an application in a code base that is not covered by StackHawk, which would introduce some inefficiency and possible compliance difficulties. It would be great if StackHawk were continuously adding more and more languages and integrations. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate StackHawk an eight, only because I wish the product was a little less expensive. It also is running into direct competition with Snyk, as they did an acquisition of another DAST company, and they should be sensitive to that and possibly offer a discount for current users because it would be under consideration to move to Snyk and reduce complexity even if it was by a little bit.