Comparison
NANOTESTING vs Detectify
Detectify is excellent at external attack surface management and bringing researcher-sourced payloads to web targets. NANOTESTING covers a wider stack (repo, mobile, cloud, Web3) and ships every finding with a confidence tier so engineers triage faster.
| Feature | NANOTESTING | Detectify |
|---|---|---|
Hosted SaaS (no agent) | ||
Surface management (subdomain discovery) Detectify EASM is the strongest part of their product. We do enough surface enumeration to find obvious orphan hosts, not a full asset inventory. | Lightweight (DNS + CT log) | Full EASM module |
GitHub repository deep-scan | ||
Mobile binary (APK / IPA) audit | ||
Web3 / smart-contract checks | ||
OpenAPI BOLA / BFLA / mass-assign | Limited (REST surface only) | |
Crowd-sourced payload feed Detectify's Crowdsource pipeline pulls fresh payloads from a hand-picked researcher network. We rely on curated public detector packs. | ||
Confidence tier on every finding | Confirmed / Likely / Possible / Informational | Severity only |
CISA KEV + EPSS prioritisation | Partial | |
Auditor-ready PDF report set | Executive + Developer + Compliance + Trend | PDF export |
Cost (single user / year) | $948 - $6,708 | $5,748+ (Surface Monitoring) + $14k+ (Application Scanning) |
Time to first scan | Minutes (verify target, run) | Same-day after onboarding |
Comparison reflects publicly documented features of Detectify as of 2026. NANOTESTING is not affiliated with or endorsed by Detectify. If you spot a factual error email support@nanotesting.com and we will correct or remove the row.
The honest take
Detectify if you live in EASM. NANOTESTING if you live in CI.
Detectify is the right call when discovering forgotten hosts is your hardest problem. NANOTESTING is the right call when the hosts are known, the code is in GitHub, and you want one auditor-ready PDF that a customer or auditor can accept end-to-end. Same money, different question.