Comparison of the effectiveness of tools for testing the security of web applications
Article Sidebar
Open full text
Issue Vol. 34 (2025)
-
Impact of metrics on the effectiveness of Kohonen network clustering
Krystian Wypart, Edyta Łukasik1-7
-
Analysis of object recognition systems using augmented reality glasses
Jan Figura, Rafał Kuźmiczuk, Marcin Badurowicz8-13
-
Comparative analysis of selected data recovery software
Tomasz Szymczyk, Rafał Wróbel14-20
-
Usability analysis of graphic user interfaces for Internet forums with consideration for Universal Design Principles
Krystian Łęczycki, Jakub Łabendowicz, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska21-28
-
Ergonomic analysis of book web services’ interfaces
Patrycja Kłodnicka, Dawid Matraszek29-35
-
Comparison of the effectiveness of tools for testing the security of web applications
Izabela Kaźmierak36-43
-
Comparative analysis of the performance of relational and non-relational databases in applications implemented in C#
Patryk Baliński, Łukasz Chudy, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska44-53
-
Analysis of performance and energy efficiency of processors with hybrid architecture
Dawid Żytko, Marcin Badurowicz54-59
-
Analysis of user identification methods in web browsers
Eduard Chyzhik, Jakub Smołka60-67
-
Multi-aspect comparative analysis of JavaScript programming frameworks – React.js and Solid.js
Jakub Kryk, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik68-75
-
Realization and discussion of selected artificial intelligence algorithms in computer games
Yurii Tyshchenko76-80
-
Comparative analysis of selected aspects of web application architectures
Łukasz Krzysztoń, Konrad Łatwiński, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik81-88
-
Evaluation of deep learning models for flood forecasting in Bangladesh
Asif Rahman Rumee89-97
-
Optical character recognition for ancient scripts: a case study on Syloti Nagri using deep learning models
Tanzidul Islam, Sheikh Kamrul Hasan Omur, Nafiz Nahid, Lukman Chowdhury, Gourab Roy, Md. Abu Naser Mojumder, Md. Janibul Alam Soeb, Md. Fahad Jubayer98-107
-
Design of a non-human proctoring and authentication system for mobile phone-based online examination
Brendan Ubochi, Emmanuel Oluleye, Charity Odeyemi, Chinyere Ubochi108-112
Main Article Content
DOI
Authors
izabela.kazmierak@pollub.edu.pl
Abstract
This article presents a comparative analysis of the effectiveness of three web application security scanners: ZAP, Wapiti, and Skipfish. Automated scanning was conducted on deliberately unsecured applications, followed by an analysis of the detected vulnerabilities. The results were presented in the form of comparative tables and graphs illustrating the number and types of detected threats. The analysis showed that ZAP detected the most vulnerabilities, particularly in low-risk categories, Skipfish excelled in identifying specific threats, while Wapiti was effective in finding simple vulnerabilities. The study demonstrated the need to combine different scanners and supplement them with manual tests for a comprehensive assessment of web application security.
Keywords:
References
[1] Y. Makino, V. Klyuev, Evaluation of web vulnerability scanners, In 2015 IEEE 8th International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications (2015) 399-402, https://doi.org/10.1109/IDAACS.2015.7340766. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/IDAACS.2015.7340766
[2] B. Zukran, M. M. Siraj, Performance Comparison on SQL Injection and XSS Detection using Open Source Vulnerability Scanners, In 2021 International Conference on Data Science and Its Applications (2021) 61-65, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICoDSA53588.2021.9617484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICoDSA53588.2021.9617484
[3] D. Sagar, S. Kukreja, J. Brahma, S. Tyagi, P. Jain, Studying open source vulnerability scanners for vulnerabilities in web applications, IIOAB Journal 9(2) (2018) 43-49.
[4] R. Amankwah, J. Chen, P. K. Kudjo, D. Towey, An empirical comparison of commercial and open‐source web vulnerability scanners, Software: Practice and Experience 50(9) (2020) 1842-1857, https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2870. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/spe.2870
[5] A. Al Anhar, Y. Suryanto, Evaluation of Web Application Vulnerability Scanner for Modern Web Application, In 2021 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science Technology (2021) 200-204, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAICST53116.2021.9497831. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICAICST53116.2021.9497831
[6] A. Kondraciuk, A. Bartos, B. Pańczyk, Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of OWASP ZAP, Burp Suite, Nikto and Skipfish in testing the security of web applications, Journal of Computer Sciences Institute 24 (2022) 176–180, https://doi.org/10.35784/jcsi.2929. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35784/jcsi.2929
[7] Dokumentacja narzędzia Zed Attack Proxy, https://www.zaproxy.org, [12.06.2024].
[8] Dokumentacja narzędzia Wapiti, https://wapiti-scanner.github.io, [12.06.2024].
[9] Kod źródłowy i dokumentacja narzędzia Skipfish, https://gitlab.com/kalilinux/packages/skipfish, [29.08.2024].
[10] Dokumentacja narzędzia Skipfish, https://www.kali.org/tools/skipfish/, [29.08.2024].
[11] Aplikacja Gin & Juice Shop, https://ginandjuice.shop/about, [29.08.2024].
[12] Kod źródłowy i dokumentacja aplikacji DSVW, https://github.com/stamparm/DSVW, [12.06.2024].
Article Details
Abstract views: 308

