We performed a comparison between Klocwork 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."The tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time."
"Klocwork's most valuable feature is the static code analysis feature. It detects the potential problem earlier to allow the developer to receive feedback quickly and then address it before it becomes a problem."
"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The reporting helps us understand the trend of our results and whether we improve over time. We can see the history within Klocwork's server architecture and know that we're making things better. It creates a great story for our management. We can demonstrate value and how our software is developing over time."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."
"Simple to use, good user interface."
"The application scanning feature is the most valuable feature."
"The interface is easy to use."
"Two features are valuable. The first one is that the scan gets completed really quickly, and the second one is that even though it searches in a limited scope, what it does in that limited scope is very good. When you use Zap for testing, you're only using it for specific aspects or you're only looking for certain things. It works very well in that limited scope."
"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"We bought Klocwork, but it was limited to one little program, but the program is now sort of failing. So, we have a license for usage on a program that is sort of failing, and we really can't use the license on anything else."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"I would like to see a version of “repeater” within OWASP ZAP, a tool capable of sending from one to 1000 of the same requests, but with preselected modified fields, changing from a predetermined word list, or manually created."
"Sometimes, we get some false positives."
"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."
"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."
"It doesn't run on absolutely every operating system."
"OWASP Zap needs to extend to mobile application testing."
"There are too many false positives."
Klocwork is ranked 12th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 20 reviews while OWASP Zap is ranked 8th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 37 reviews. Klocwork is rated 8.2, while OWASP Zap is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security ". Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, Checkmarx One and CodeSonar, whereas OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Veracode and PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional. See our Klocwork 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.