We performed a comparison between Owasp Zap and Portswigger Burp Suite Professional based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Owasp Zap seems to be a superior solution. All other things being more or less equal, our reviewers found the full version of Portswigger Burp Suite Professional to be rather expensive to purchase. Additionally, some users of Portswigger Burp Suite Professional are not so impressed by the technical support and documentation that it offers. Finally, one user of Portswigger Burp Suite Professional implied that it would be a better product if it had a HUD like Owasp Zap.
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"You can run it against multiple targets."
"ZAP is easy to use. The automated scan is a powerful feature. You can simulate attacks with various parameters. ZAP integrates well with SonarQube."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. I think it's stable enough. I don't see any crashes within the application, so its stability is high."
"Simple to use, good user interface."
"The API is exceptional."
"This solution has improved my organization because it has made us feel safer doing frequent deployments for web applications. If we have something really big, we might get some professional company in to help us but if we're releasing small products, we will check it ourselves with Zap. It makes it easier and safer."
"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."
"It helps in API testing, where manual intervention was previously necessary for each payload."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the dashboard. It is very informative and you can receive all the information you need in one place. It's clear, well-defined, and organized. Anybody without any cybersecurity can use it."
"The automated scan is what I find most useful because a lot of customers will need it. Not every domain will be looking for complete security, they just need a stamp on the security key. For these kinds of customers, the scan works really well."
"We are mostly using it for scanning the entire website. So, we basically create a script with the entire website and then run it for different injections."
"You can scan any number of applications and it updates its database."
"The feature that we have found most valuable is that it comes with pre-set configurations. They have a set of predefined options where you can pick one and start scanning. We also have the option of creating our own configurations, like how often do the applications need to be scanned."
"With the Extender Tab, if you know how to code then you can create a plugin and add it to Burp."
"Some of the extensions, available using Burp Extender, are also very good and we have found issues by using them."
"Deployment is somewhat complicated."
"The product should allow users to customize the report based on their needs."
"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."
"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."
"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."
"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."
"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"The price could be better. The rest is fine."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The tool is very expensive."
"We wish that the Spider feature would appear in the same shape that it does in previous versions."
"In the Professional version, we cannot link it with the CI/CD process."
"I would like to see the return of the spider mechanism instead of the crawling feature. Burp Suite's earlier version 1.7 had an excellent spider option, and it would be beneficial if Burp incorporated those features into the current version. The crawling techniques used in the current version are not as efficient as those used in earlier versions."
"I need the solution to be more user-friendly. The solution needs to be user-friendly."
"The biggest improvement that I would like to see from PortSwigger that today many people see as an issue in their testing. There might be a feature which might be desired."
More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OWASP Zap is ranked 7th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 37 reviews while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is ranked 5th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 57 reviews. OWASP Zap is rated 7.6, while PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional writes "The solution is versatile and easy to deploy, but it needs to give more detailed security reports". OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Veracode and Checkmarx One, whereas PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is most compared with Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix, HCL AppScan, Qualys Web Application Scanning and SonarQube. See our OWASP Zap vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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.
Yes OWASP ZAP is a good option as it's an open source so always preferred but Burp Suite Pro will give you more options, its one of the best tool to have for pentesters so defo worth it.
First things first both are having their own merits, however in my personal experience ZAP can replace your burpsuite for sure considering the License. Also as the latest ZAP versions are covering more advanced techniques and spidering patterns with lots of options in it, it is worth considering ZAP. However remember that burpsuite from latest versions with inbuilt chromium and it's emerging plugin support (Installable jars) you can use burp to the fullest and you can keep it as a swiss knife for your web and app pentesting. Couple of extensions in burp pro are interesting especially the race condition one. I always prefer using Burp and at instances I go with ZAP.
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with quality security vulnerabilities. Both are very comparable in terms of intercepting features, fuzzing capabilities, and encoder and decoders. Both OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have a spider feature, and provide updates.
One big difference between the two, though, is price. OWASP Zap is free, but Burp Suite Pro requires a paid subscription (currently $399 per year). OWASP Zap is maintained by volunteers whereas Burp Suite Pro is a commercial product maintained and sold by PortSwigger, which makes me feel more confident in it. In addition, OWASP Zap provides little documentation, which may be why some people prefer Burp Suite Pro (which offers extensive documentation). Moreover, Burp Suite Pro includes more coverage than OWASP Zap. But it is also worth noting that OWASP Zap has more false positives than Burp Suite Pro.
I like Burp Suite Pro’s interface a lot more than OWASP Zap’s. Another big plus for me with Burp is its Comparer tab,which allows for easier change detection. OWASP Zap does not include this feature without extensions and a ZAP plugin is required. Another thing about OWASP Zap I dislike is that the ability to search for text in the request or server response is difficult, while Burp Suite Pro makes it easier and more accessible.
Conclusion:
In my opinion, Burp Suite Pro is better than OWASP Zap because of its features, which I feel make it a better choice for security professionals. Both OWASP Zap and Burp Suite Pro have good sets of capabilities. However, Burp Suite Pro excels in the specific capabilities I need in more ways that OWASP Zap does.