Acunetix Web Application Vulnerability Report
Acunetix compiles an annual web application vulnerability report in order to provide security experts and interested parties with an analysis of data on vulnerabilities gathered over the previous year.
The 2019 report contains the results and analysis of vulnerabilities, detected from the automated web and network perimeter scans run on the Acunetix Online platform, over a 12 month period, across more than 10,000 scan targets. We invite you to download the report and gather insight on high, medium and low severity vulnerabilities which could be lurking in your web applications.
To be more specific:
- 67,355 Network Scans
- 10,000 Scan targets
- 76,686 Web scans
What are the most critical web vulnerabilities in 2019?
The report gives you the low down on:
- Which vulnerabilities are rising and falling in frequency
- Current security concerns, such as the increasing complexity of new apps, the accelerating rate of new versions, and the problem of scale
- Changes in threat landscape from both the client and server sides
- The four major stages of vulnerability analysis
- Vulnerability findings by type and severity
- An analysis of each discovered vulnerability in terms of how it works, its statistical status and pointers for remediation.
You can download the full report here:
https://www.acunetix.com/acunetix-web-application-vulnerability-report/
Cyber @ This blog :
https://www.erdalozkaya.com/category/cybersecurity/
CISO Insight
Web application vulnerability scanning is not optional — it is table stakes. With OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities still appearing in production applications year after year, every CISO needs an automated scanning programme integrated into the development lifecycle. The question is not whether to scan, but how to make scanning fast enough and accurate enough to keep pace with modern development velocity.
Web Application Security: Why It Still Matters in 2026
Web applications remain the most common entry point for attackers. Despite decades of awareness about SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and authentication flaws, the OWASP Top 10 list reads remarkably similar to what it looked like ten years ago. The persistence of these vulnerabilities is not a failure of awareness — it is a failure of process. Developers are under pressure to ship fast, security testing is often bolted on at the end of the development cycle, and the complexity of modern web applications (APIs, microservices, single-page applications, third-party dependencies) creates an attack surface that manual code review alone cannot adequately cover.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) tools like Acunetix, Invicti, and Burp Suite Enterprise address this gap by automatically crawling and testing web applications for vulnerabilities. They simulate attacks against running applications, identifying issues that static analysis cannot detect — such as authentication bypass, misconfigured security headers, and server-side vulnerabilities that only manifest at runtime.
Building a Mature Application Security Programme
An effective application security programme integrates multiple testing approaches across the development lifecycle. Static Application Security Testing (SAST) analyses source code during development. Software Composition Analysis (SCA) identifies known vulnerabilities in open-source dependencies. DAST scans running applications for runtime vulnerabilities. And manual penetration testing provides depth that automated tools cannot match. The goal is not to choose one approach over another but to layer them so that vulnerabilities are caught at the earliest and most cost-effective point in the development process.
For CISOs, the challenge is making application security fast enough to keep pace with CI/CD pipelines. If security scans add hours to the deployment process, developers will find ways to bypass them. The most effective programmes integrate lightweight scanning into pull request workflows (catching critical issues early) and run comprehensive scans as part of nightly or weekly builds (catching the deeper issues). Breaking builds for critical vulnerabilities while logging lower-severity findings creates a pragmatic balance between security and development velocity.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between SAST, DAST, and IAST?
SAST (Static Application Security Testing) analyses source code without executing it, catching issues early in development. DAST (Dynamic Application Security Testing) tests running applications by simulating attacks from the outside. IAST (Interactive Application Security Testing) combines both approaches using agents that monitor applications during testing. Each has strengths — SAST catches code-level flaws early, DAST finds runtime and configuration issues, and IAST provides context-rich results with lower false positive rates.
How should CISOs prioritise application security vulnerabilities?
Prioritise based on exploitability, business impact, and exposure. A critical SQL injection in a public-facing application processing customer data demands immediate remediation. The same vulnerability in an internal tool accessed by three developers can wait. Use CVSS scores as a starting point but always apply business context — not all critical vulnerabilities carry equal risk to your specific organisation.
Related reading: For comprehensive security testing guidance, visit our Cyber Resilience Hub or download the CISO Toolkit for application security programme templates.