OWASP Zap vs. Veracode

As of June 2019, OWASP Zap is ranked 5th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 9 reviews vs Veracode which is ranked 1st in Application Security Testing (AST) with 44 reviews. The top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Inexpensive licensing, free to use, and has good community support". The top reviewer of Veracode writes "Enables us to automatically submit each new build for scanning and get results directly into our JIRA". OWASP Zap is most compared with PortSwigger Burp, Acunetix Vulnerability Scanner and IBM Security AppScan. Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand and Checkmarx. See our OWASP Zap vs. Veracode report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OWASP Zap Logo
22,201 views|14,892 comparisons
Veracode Logo
49,257 views|21,812 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
348,275 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 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.​It has improved my organization with faster security tests.​The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites.

Read more »

We used it for performing security checks. We have many Java applications and Android applications. Essentially it was used for checking the security validations for compliance purposes.I have used this solution in multiple projects for vulnerability testing and finding security leaks within the code.The most valuable feature comes from the fact that it is cloud-based, and I can scale up without having to worry about any other infrastructure needs.We are using the Veracode tools to expose the engineers to the security vulnerabilities that were introduced with the new features, i.e. a lot faster or sooner in the development life cycle.One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important.It has an easy-to-use interface.Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools.It has almost completely eliminated the presence of SQLi vulnerabilities.

Read more »

Cons
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.It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap.The port scanner is a little too slow.​It doesn't run on absolutely every operating system.

Read more »

One of the things that we have from a reporting point of view, is that we would love to see a graphical report. If you look through a report for something that has come back from Veracode, it takes a whole lot of time to just go through all the pages of the code to figure out exactly what it says. We know certain areas don’t have the greatest security features but those are usually minor and we don’t want to see those types of notifications.Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them.I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages.Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis.We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times. That kind of feature would save us time.Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives.The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report.It needs more timely support for newer languages and framework versions.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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.It's free and open, currently under the Apache 2 license. If ZAP does what you need it to do, selling a free solution is a very easy.

Read more »

They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey.They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works.Veracode has been fair. We use their SaaS solution and it's just an annual subscription.No issues, the pricing seems reasonable.It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool.I recommend going for a one-year licensing with CA, because currently they are the leaders in this field with more features and a much better turn around time with a cheaper position, but there are a lot of new companies coming up in the market and they are building up their platforms.Costs are reasonable. No special infrastructure is required and the license model is good.I think the pricing is in line with the rest of the tools. I think you get what you pay for. It is certainly not inexpensive, but the value proposition is there. There are certainly cheaper tools, but I don't think we'd be getting the support that we get with those, and that is what separates this product from the others.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Testing (AST) solutions are best for your needs.
348,275 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
22,201
Comparisons
14,892
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
412
Avg. Rating
8.4
Views
49,257
Comparisons
21,812
Reviews
41
Average Words per Review
619
Avg. Rating
8.2
Top Comparisons
Compared 65% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 46% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Learn
OWASP
Veracode
Overview

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.

Veracode is an application security company that offers an automated cloud-based service for securing web, mobile and third-party enterprise applications. Veracode provides multiple security analysis technologies on a single platform, including static analysis, dynamic analysis, mobile application behavioral analysis and software composition analysis.

Offer
Learn more about OWASP Zap
Learn more about Veracode
Sample Customers
Information Not Available
State of Missouri, Rekner
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm36%
Insurance Company18%
Consumer Goods9%
Hospitality Company5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm32%
Healthcare Company10%
Software R&D Company10%
Manufacturing Company7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business25%
Midsize Enterprise17%
Large Enterprise58%
REVIEWERS
Small Business24%
Midsize Enterprise24%
Large Enterprise52%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise72%
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
348,275 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.

Sign Up with Email