We performed a comparison between Ixia BreakingPoint and OWASP Zap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."
"The community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."
"They offer free access to some other tools."
"ZAP is easy to use. The automated scan is a powerful feature. You can simulate attacks with various parameters. ZAP integrates well with SonarQube."
"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."
"The price could be better."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."
"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."
"The product reporting could be improved."
"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."
"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."
"Sometimes, we get some false positives."
"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."
"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."
Ixia BreakingPoint is ranked 23rd in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 8 reviews while OWASP Zap is ranked 7th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 37 reviews. Ixia BreakingPoint is rated 8.4, while OWASP Zap is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Ixia BreakingPoint writes "Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security ". Ixia BreakingPoint is most compared with Spirent CyberFlood and Synopsys Defensics, whereas OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Veracode. See our Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OWASP Zap report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.