Comparative analysis of network vulnerability detection tools
Article Sidebar
Issue Vol. 40 (2026)
-
Analysis of the capabilities of predictive artificial intelligence models in corporate risk management
Kacper Ziemski188-192
-
Usability and availability of selected e-commerce services
Marcin Kozicki, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska193-200
-
Comparison of C++ and Python performance based on selected algorithms
Szymon Bogucki, Kacper Burda201-205
-
Security analysis of selected web applications using vulnerability scanners
Mariusz Choroś, Marta Dziuba-Kozieł206-212
-
Comparison of Java and .NET reflection mechanisms for dynamic module loading: a performance benchmark study
Michał Mazur, Sebastian Maruszak, Marek Miłosz213-217
-
Comparative analysis of network vulnerability detection tools
Mateusz Zdunek218-225
-
Evaluation of mobile applications for personal finance management using the MARS scale
Łukasz Nikiel, Artsiom Patskevich, Marek Miłosz226-231
-
Comparison of the effectiveness of roulette betting strategies using Monte Carlo simulation
Marek Sarnecki232-238
-
Analysis of optimization capabilities of selected database management systems
Paweł Tarkiewicz, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik239-246
-
Comparative analysis of Espresso and Appium frameworks for automated UI testing of Android mobile applications
Jakub Derkacz247-254
-
Comparative analysis of the applicability of artificial intelligence models for code generation
Patryk Warchoł, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik255-262
-
Comparison of the effectiveness of selected tools for detecting texts generated by artificial intelligence
Marcin Brodacki, Małgorzata Plechawska-Wójcik263-269
-
Comparative analysis of selected containerization tools in terms of MCP
Paweł Jan Tłusty, Maciej Pańczyk270-276
-
SpikeCliff effect: empirical analysis of deterministic timing discontinuities in sponge-based XOF functions
Łukasz Wójcik, Stanisław Lota277-282
-
Comparison of AI agents for creating SQL queries
Julia Sierpień, Maria Skublewska-Paszkowska283-288
-
Comparative analysis of the performance of PostgreSQL and Neo4j databases in the context of genealogical queries
Michał Muzyka, Mateusz Niedźwiedź, Marek Miłosz289-296
-
Evaluation of the effectiveness of static and dynamic methods in malware analysis
Dominik Tracz, Daniel Sawicki, Konrad Gromaszek297-303
-
Comparison of classical machine learning methods in the task of obesity level classification
Paweł Biesaga, Paweł Powroźnik304-312
Main Article Content
Authors
Abstract
In times of growing global tensions, attacks on ICT infrastructure are becoming increasingly common. The field of IT systems security is becoming even more important. Various types of network vulnerability testing tools allow for the examination and improvement of the security of such systems. This article aims to compare and analyze selected network vulnerability testing tools. The systems that were examined are Nessus by Tenable, which is an enterprise-class tool, OpenVAS by Greenbone, which is an open-source project, and Nmap, a standard network mapping utility explicitly utilized in this study as a baseline tool.
Keywords:
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)
- Industry, Innovation, Technology and Infrastructure
- Partnerships for the goals
References
[1] S. Mitchell, Mandiant report finds rise in financially motivated cyber attacks, https://securitybrief.asia/story/mandiant-report-finds-rise-in-financially-motivated-cyber-attacks, [11.11.2025].
[2] N. Mihaylov, Cyber Dimensions of a Hybrid Warfare, https://cyberpeaceinstitute.org/news/cyber-dimensions-of-a-hybrid-warfare/, [11.11.2025].
[3] Help Net Security, Edgescan 2025 Vulnerability Statistics Report, https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2025/04/30/edgescan-2025-vulnerability-statistics/, [02.02.2026].
[4] S. Toyin, Comparative analysis of security vulnerability scanners (Nessus and OpenVAS) in cloud environment, Master thesis, University of Bolton, Bolton 2023.
[5] J. Samera, M. Mapfirakupa, Comparative Analysis of Network Scanning Tools for Windows and Ubuntu VMs, International Journal of Engineering Management and Humanities 6(2) (2025) 29-38, https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.23826.98242.
[6] I. Chalvatzis, D. Karras, R. Papademetriou, Reproducible modelling and simulating security vulnerability scanners evaluation framework towards risk management assessment of small and medium enterprises business networks, Indian Journal of Science and Technology 13(37) (2020) 3910-3943, https://doi.org/10.17485/IJST/v13i37.868.
[7] F. Alghamdi, A Comparative Analysis of Network Enumeration Tools, Journal of Computer Science & Computational Mathematics 14(4) (2024) 21-26, https://doi.org/10.20967/jcscm.2024.04.001.
[8] A. Chaturvedi, B. Lakhani, T. Agarwal, Mohana, M. Moharir, A. Kumar, A Comprehensive Vulnerability Tools Analysis for Security and Control in IT Environment and Organizations, In 2024 5th International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems (ICESC) IEEE (2024) 612-618, https://doi.org/10.1109/ICESC60852.2024.10689860.
[9] Accio, 2025 Operating System Market Share Trends: Key Insights & Predictions, https://www.accio.com/business/operating-system-market-share-trend, [25.01.2026].
[10] R. Sharma, R. Sibal, S. Sabharwal, Change Point Modelling in the Vulnerability Discovery Process, In: A. Luhach, D. Singh, P. Hsiung, K. Hawari, P. Lingras, P. Singh, (eds) Advanced Informatics for Computing Research. Communications in Computer and Information Science, Springer 956 (2019) 559-568, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3143-5_46.
Article Details
Abstract views: 4

