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."We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."
"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."
"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."
"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."
"I like that we can test cloud applications."
"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."
"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 interface is easy to use."
"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"The community edition updates services regularly. They add new vulnerabilities into the scanning list."
"It scans while you navigate, then you can save the requests performed and work with them later."
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."
"I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks."
"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."
"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."
"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 production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."
"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 price could be better."
"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."
"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."
"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."
"The technical support team must be proactive."
"The ability to search the internet for other use cases and to use the solution to make applications more secure should be addressed."
"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."
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.