Comparison · Scanners and DAST

Crossfyre vs Intruder

A managed SMB vulnerability scanner vs BYO-compute penetration testing.

Intruder is a clean, managed SaaS vulnerability scanner aimed at SMBs: continuous scanning, emerging-threat checks, and a tidy dashboard, billed per target/subscription. It is closed and runs from Intruder’s infrastructure. Crossfyre is the operator-controlled alternative: open-source engines on BYO-compute nodes you own, distributed recon that flows into authenticated scanning and BOLA/BFLA/BOPLA authorization testing, with adaptive pacing and isolated egress for authorized offensive work.

Every claim about the other tool is taken from its own documentation and pricing as of mid-2026. Re-check before quoting a number.

Standards

What it covers, and what it will not claim.

Pick a list. Every row that says yes names the class that does the work, and every row that says no says why, because a coverage matrix with no gaps in it is a brochure.

8 covered 1 partly 1 not claimed The list this engine was built against. Eight fully, one partly, and one that nothing on the outside can honestly report.

• API1 Broken object level authorization yes
• API2 Broken authentication partly
• API3 Broken object property level authorization yes
• API4 Unrestricted resource consumption yes
• API5 Broken function level authorization yes
• API6 Unrestricted access to sensitive business flows yes
• API7 Server side request forgery yes
• API8 Security misconfiguration yes
• API9 Improper inventory management yes
• API10 Unsafe consumption of APIs no

MITRE ATT&CK is deliberately not here. It describes what an adversary does across a whole intrusion, and almost all of a web scanner collapses into one technique in it. A six-row ATT&CK matrix would look impressive and tell you nothing, which is the opposite of what this section is for.

Questions people ask