We performed a comparison between OWASP Zap and SonarCloud 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."The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."
"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool."
"The interface is easy to use."
"It has improved my organization with faster security tests."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"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."
"The solution has tightened our security."
"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."
"SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."
"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."
"It needs more robust reporting tools."
"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."
"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."
"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
OWASP Zap is ranked 7th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 37 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews. OWASP Zap is rated 7.6, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. 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 SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Rapid7 InsightAppSec, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and Coverity. See our OWASP Zap vs. SonarCloud 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.