<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Independent Web Vulnerability Scanner Comparison &#8211; Acunetix WVS, IBM Rational AppScan &amp; HP WebInspect</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.darknet.org.uk/2009/01/independent-web-vulnerability-scanner-comparison-acunetix-wvs-ibm-rational-appscan-hp-webinspect/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.darknet.org.uk/2009/01/independent-web-vulnerability-scanner-comparison-acunetix-wvs-ibm-rational-appscan-hp-webinspect/</link>
	<description>Ethical Hacking, Penetration Testing &#38; Computer Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:17:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pantagruel</title>
		<link>http://www.darknet.org.uk/2009/01/independent-web-vulnerability-scanner-comparison-acunetix-wvs-ibm-rational-appscan-hp-webinspect/#comment-125469</link>
		<dc:creator>Pantagruel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2009 08:35:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.darknet.org.uk/?p=1440#comment-125469</guid>
		<description>With Navin,

Yep nice report. 
The amount of missed and false negatives is worrying and it&#039;s a good thing for Acunetix that they appear to do so well. The other should definitely wake up and get improving.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>With Navin,</p>
<p>Yep nice report.<br />
The amount of missed and false negatives is worrying and it&#8217;s a good thing for Acunetix that they appear to do so well. The other should definitely wake up and get improving.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sploo</title>
		<link>http://www.darknet.org.uk/2009/01/independent-web-vulnerability-scanner-comparison-acunetix-wvs-ibm-rational-appscan-hp-webinspect/#comment-125463</link>
		<dc:creator>Sploo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 18:09:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.darknet.org.uk/?p=1440#comment-125463</guid>
		<description>I think it&#039;s stupid to use the WebInspect demo page.  Why wouldn&#039;t WI win for that one!?!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s stupid to use the WebInspect demo page.  Why wouldn&#8217;t WI win for that one!?!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: navin</title>
		<link>http://www.darknet.org.uk/2009/01/independent-web-vulnerability-scanner-comparison-acunetix-wvs-ibm-rational-appscan-hp-webinspect/#comment-125461</link>
		<dc:creator>navin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 14:01:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.darknet.org.uk/?p=1440#comment-125461</guid>
		<description>This simply proves what I&#039;ve always felt: Acunetix +Acusensor is the best choice out there

A bit slower, but extremely valuable!!

Nice report though!!

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This simply proves what I&#8217;ve always felt: Acunetix +Acusensor is the best choice out there</p>
<p>A bit slower, but extremely valuable!!</p>
<p>Nice report though!!</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: phage101</title>
		<link>http://www.darknet.org.uk/2009/01/independent-web-vulnerability-scanner-comparison-acunetix-wvs-ibm-rational-appscan-hp-webinspect/#comment-125460</link>
		<dc:creator>phage101</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:54:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.darknet.org.uk/?p=1440#comment-125460</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s brutal at best...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s brutal at best&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

