Compare Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OWASP Zap

Ixia BreakingPoint is ranked 17th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 4 reviews while OWASP Zap is ranked 5th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 10 reviews. Ixia BreakingPoint is rated 8.4, while OWASP Zap is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Ixia BreakingPoint writes "Validates the datasheets for anti-malware, DDoS, and ransomware response with prediction". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Inexpensive licensing, free to use, and has good community support". Ixia BreakingPoint is most compared with Spirent CyberFlood, Codenomicon Defensics and OWASP Zap, whereas OWASP Zap is most compared with PortSwigger Burp, Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner and Veracode. See our Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OWASP Zap report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Ixia BreakingPoint Logo
1,782 views|762 comparisons
OWASP Zap Logo
24,588 views|18,270 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,070 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible.There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades.We use Ixia BreakingPoint for Layer 7 traffic generation. That's what we like.The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use.

Read more »

The scalability of this product is very good.The reporting is quite intuitive, which gives you a clear indication of what kind of vulnerability you have that you can drill down on to gather more information.The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool.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 can be used effectively for internal auditing.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.Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs.

Read more »

Cons
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 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.I would appreciate some preconfigured network neighborhoods, which are predefined settings for testing networks.

Read more »

I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers.I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help.The automated vulnerability assessments that the application performs needs to be simplified as well as diversified.There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap.If there was an easier to understand exactly what has been checked and what has not been checked, it would make this solution better. We have to trust that it has checked all known vulnerabilities but it's a bit hard to see after the scanning.It needs more robust reporting tools.As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this.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.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost.We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars.There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that.

Read more »

This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing.OWASP Zap is free to use.It's free. It's good for us because we don't know what the extent of our use will be yet. It's good to start with something free and easy to use.OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate.As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Testing (AST) solutions are best for your needs.
406,070 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
1,782
Comparisons
762
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
515
Avg. Rating
8.3
Views
24,588
Comparisons
18,270
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
387
Avg. Rating
8.2
Top Comparisons
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 63% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Learn
Ixia
OWASP
Overview

By simulating real-world legitimate traffic, distributed denial of service (DDoS), exploits, malware, and fuzzing, BreakingPoint validates an organization’s security infrastructure, reduces the risk of network degradation by almost 80%, and increases attack readiness by nearly 70%.

Zed Attack Proxy (ZAP) is a free, open-source penetration testing tool being maintained under the umbrella of the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP). ZAP is designed specifically for testing web applications and is both flexible and extensible.

Offer
Learn more about Ixia BreakingPoint
Learn more about OWASP Zap
Sample Customers
Corsa Technology
Information Not Available
Top Industries
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company43%
Comms Service Provider12%
Government7%
Media Company7%
Find out what your peers are saying about Ixia BreakingPoint vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,070 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.