Barrion vs Manual Security Audit
Barrion delivers automated, continuous web app security checks with step-by-step fixes. Manual security audits are human-led, point-in-time assessments. Both have a place: Barrion for ongoing coverage, manual audits for depth and compliance. Below we compare approach, scope, and cost.
Comparison at a glance
| Aspect | Barrion | Manual security audit |
|---|---|---|
| Approach | Automated, passive scans, repeatable | Human analysts: interview, review, and testing |
| Scope | Web app: TLS, headers, config, exposure | Often broader: policies, processes, code, infra |
| Frequency | Continuous, as often as you schedule | Typically annual or project-based |
| Output | Findings with step-by-step remediation, PDF/CSV | Audit report with recommendations |
| Cost | Subscription, predictable | Per-engagement, variable |
Who Barrion is best for
Teams that want automated, continuous coverage of web app security (TLS, headers, misconfigurations) and clear remediation without waiting for the next audit cycle.
Who Manual security audit is best for
Organizations that need a formal audit for compliance (e.g. SOC 2, ISO 27001), certification, or a deep human review of policies and processes. Often required by regulators or customers.
Summary
Use Barrion for ongoing web app security and evidence between audits. Use manual audits when you need formal certification, independent assessment, or review beyond what automation covers. Many teams use Barrion to stay secure year-round and commission manual audits for compliance and certification.
Try Barrion with a free scan, no credit card required. See your results and step-by-step fixes in under a minute.
Run free security scan →
