Troja vs. CyScan.io: recon tool vs. fix-it scanner

Short version: CyScan.io is a free attack-surface / URL recon scanner — excellent for mapping endpoints, subdomains and assets. Troja is a fix-and-ship scanner: security + SEO + AEO with copy-paste AI fix prompts, connected deep-stack scans and monitoring. They solve different jobs, and they work well together.

What is CyScan.io?

CyScan.io (cyscan.io) is a free "cyber URL scanner" aimed at security researchers and developers. It does endpoint discovery, passive-DNS subdomain enumeration (via crt.sh, CertSpotter and HackerTarget), directory fuzzing, redirect-chain analysis, asset/performance waterfalls with CDN detection, tech-stack detection and multi-device screenshots. It's 100% free, no registration — but by its own admission it isn't a full-stack vulnerability scanner.

Troja vs. CyScan.io at a glance

Where CyScan.io is strong

CyScan.io is one of the best free recon tools around. Its passive-DNS subdomain enumeration, directory fuzzing and multi-device screenshots are genuinely useful for mapping an attack surface or comparing environments — and there's no signup or paywall. If your job is reconnaissance, it does it well.

Where Troja goes further

CyScan.io stops at mapping; Troja is built to fix. It scores SEO and AEO, prioritizes findings by severity, and writes a copy-paste AI fix prompt for each one. It scans the stack behind the page via connectors, re-tests fixes, and monitors for regressions — none of which is CyScan.io's purpose.

Which should you choose?

• You want free attack-surface recon (subdomains, endpoints, screenshots) → CyScan.io.
• You want to scan, prioritize and fix security + SEO + AEO with AI → Troja.
• Best of both: map with CyScan.io, then fix with Troja.

See the full comparison: Troja vs. checkvibe, OffURL, Fixnx & more.

Use CyScan as reconnaissance, not as a launch verdict

CyScan answers “what public surface can I map quickly?” Its official page describes endpoint discovery, certificate-derived subdomains, directory fuzzing, redirects, assets, performance observations and screenshots at multiple viewport sizes. Those artifacts are useful inputs to a security review: an forgotten subdomain, an unexpected redirect or an old JavaScript bundle can reveal where to investigate next. They are not, by themselves, proof of a vulnerability.

Troja answers a different operational question: “which security, search and AI-visibility findings should the product team fix and retest?” The useful comparison is therefore not total findings. It is whether the output matches the next person doing the work.

A two-tool workflow that preserves evidence

1. Run CyScan only against a domain you own or are authorized to assess. Save the discovered hosts, endpoint list, redirect chain and screenshots.
2. Remove third-party hosts and assets that are outside the agreed scope. A CDN hostname or analytics endpoint is not automatically yours to probe.
3. Classify the remaining inventory as production, preview, legacy or unknown. Confirm ownership before active requests.
4. Feed owned URLs into the fix-oriented scan. Correlate findings by URL and response rather than assuming similarly named checks are equivalent.
5. Manually validate access control on the highest-value endpoints and retire forgotten hosts instead of merely hiding them.

Directory fuzzing and endpoint discovery can create traffic that looks hostile. Even a free, no-registration tool does not remove the need for authorization, rate awareness and a written scope. Run against staging first when possible, review application and WAF logs, and avoid treating absence of findings as absence of risk.

When handing the inventory to another engineer, include the scan timestamp, resolved IPs, canonical host, tool-reported data sources and everything removed as out of scope. That provenance prevents a certificate-transparency hostname from being mistaken for a live owned service. Re-run only the changed host set after remediation so the follow-up measures deliberate work rather than ordinary internet drift.

Choose CyScan alone for a quick public inventory or visual comparison. Choose Troja alone when you already know the in-scope URL and need prioritized remediation across security, SEO and answer visibility. Use both when an inherited application has an uncertain perimeter: recon establishes the map, then the deeper scan and human tests establish what is actually exposed. Continue with how to check whether a website is secure and the OWASP guide for indie hackers.