GitGuardian Platform vs OWASP Zap comparison

GitGuardian and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. GitGuardian is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.7, while OWASP is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. GitGuardian holds a 0.6% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 4.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of GitGuardian users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

GitGuardian Platform

Read 32 GitGuardian Platform reviews

4,023 Views
1,971 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,982 Views
8,174 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

GitGuardian Platform

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 28, 2025

OWASP Zap and GitGuardian Platform are competing products in the security domain. GitGuardian Platform has a superior feature set, offering stronger capabilities, although OWASP Zap excels in pricing and support.

Features: OWASP Zap includes an intercepting proxy, plug and hack support, and extensive automated scanning capabilities. GitGuardian Platform effectively detects hardcoded secrets, ensures the security of software development processes, and offers robust monitoring tools.

Room for Improvement: OWASP Zap could enhance its user interface for greater ease of navigation, improve integration with third-party tools, and offer more tailored customer support. GitGuardian Platform may benefit from reducing its false positive rate, refining its alert notification system, and expanding its support for a wider range of programming languages.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap is straightforward to deploy, supported by a strong community of users, and is known for its ease of use. GitGuardian Platform provides a structured deployment path coupled with dedicated customer service, offering guided setup processes and high-level support that enhance the user experience.

Pricing and ROI: OWASP Zap is an open-source tool, minimizing costs and delivering a high ROI for budget-sensitive teams. GitGuardian Platform involves higher initial expenditures, but its comprehensive feature set and customer support justify the price, offering a solid ROI for those requiring resource-intensive security solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,140 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

GitGuardian Platform

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (8th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (6th), Software Supply Chain Security (4th), DevSecOps (3rd), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (4th)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

11th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 4.7%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Ney Roman

DevOps Engineer at Deuna App

Facilitates efficient secret management and improves development processes

Regarding the exceptions in GitGuardian Platform, we know that within the platform we have a way to accept a path or a directory from a repository, but it is not that visible at the very beginning. You have to figure out where to search for it, and once you have it, it is really good, but it is not that visible at the beginning. This should be made more exposed. The documentation could be better because it was not that comprehensively documented. When we started working with GitGuardian Platform, it was difficult to find some specific use cases, and we were not aware of that. It might have improved now, but at that time, it was not something we would recommend.

Read full review

Amit Beniwal

Project Manager at Al Hassan LLC

Simplifies vulnerability discovery and has high quality support

There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores. Sometimes, a vulnerability initially categorized as high severity may be reduced to medium or low over time after security patches are applied. This alignment with the present severity score and CVSS score could be improved.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It enables us to identify leaks that happened in the past and remediate current leaks as they happen in near real-time. When I say "near real-time," I mean within minutes. These are industry-leading remediation timelines for credential leaks. Previously, it might have taken companies years to get credentials detected or remediated. We can do it in minutes."

"The newest addition that we appreciate about GitGuardian Platform is the ability to create a custom detector, which we built and worked with the team, and that works very effectively."

"The Explore function is valuable for finding specific things I'm looking for."

"GitGuardian public leak detection significantly enhances our organization's data security by continuously monitoring public repositories."

"When they give you a description of what happened, it's really easy to follow and to retest. And the ability to retest is something that you don't have in other solutions. If a secret was detected, you can retest if it is still there. It will show you if it is in the history."

"The breadth of the solution detection capabilities is pretty good. They have good categories and a lot of different types of secrets... it gives us a great range when it comes to types of secrets, and that's good for us."

"The stability of the GitGuardian Platform is excellent."

"It's fantastic. We have checked a couple of other vendors and seen their results, which are quite inferior to the amount of detail that the GitGuardian Platform provides. With instantaneous notifications connected to our Slack platform, it allows us to deal quickly with incidents."

More GitGuardian Platform pros

"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."

"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."

"Simple and easy to learn and master."

"The ZAP scan and code crawler are valuable features."

"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."

"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

"It scans while you navigate, then you can save the requests performed and work with them later."

"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"I would like to see more fine-grained access controls when tickets are assigned for incidents. I would like the ability to provide more controls to the team leads or the product managers so that they can drive what we, the AppSec team, are doing."

"We have been somewhat confused by the dashboard at times."

"The documentation could be improved because when we started working with GitGuardian, it was difficult to find specific use cases."

"There is room for improvement in its integration for bug-tracking. It should be more direct. They have invested a lot in user management, but they need to invest in integrations. That is a real lack."

"The analytics in GitGuardian Platform have a significant opportunity to better reflect the value provided to security teams and demonstrate actual activity occurring."

"We have encountered occasional difficulties with the Single Sign-On process."

"They could give a developer access to a dashboard for their team's repositories that just shows their repository secrets. I think more could be exposed to developers."

"It would be nice if they supported detecting PII or had some kind of data loss prevention feature."

More GitGuardian Platform cons

"The ability to search the internet for other use cases and to use the solution to make applications more secure should be addressed."

"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."

"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."

"There are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores."

"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."

"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."

"Zap could improve by providing better reports for security and recommendations for the vulnerabilities."

"The reporting feature could be more descriptive."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You get what you pay for. It's one of the more expensive solutions, but it is very good, and the low false positive rate is a really appealing factor."

"It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are very happy with the value we get."

"We don't have a huge number of users, but its yearly rate was quite reasonable when compared to other per-seat solutions that we looked at... Having a free plan for a small number of users was really great. If you're a small team, I don't see why you wouldn't want to get started with it."

"I compared the solution to a couple of other solutions, and I think it is very competitively priced."

"With GitGuardian, we didn't need any middlemen."

"The internal side is cheap per user. It is annual pricing based on the number of users."

"GitGuardian is on the pricier side."

"The pricing is reasonable. GitGuardian is one of the most recent security tools we've adopted. When it came time to renew it, there was no doubt about it. It is licensed per developer, so it scales nicely with the number of repos that we have. We can create new repositories and break up work. It isn't scaling based on the amount of data it's consuming."

More GitGuardian Platform pricing and cost advice

"The tool is open source."

"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."

"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

"It is open source, and we can scan freely."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Government

18%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

It's also worth mentioning that GitGuardian is unique because they have a free tier that we've been using for the first twelve months. It provides full functionality for smaller teams. We're a smal...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives. We utilize the automated playbooks from GitGuardian Platform, and we are enhancing them. We will pr...

See all answers

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...

See all answers

What do you like most about OWASP Zap?

The best feature is the Zap HUD (Heads Up Display) because the customers can use the website normally. If we scan websites with automatic scanning, and the website has a web application firewall, i...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OWASP Zap?

OWASP might be cost-effective, however, people prefer to use the free edition available as open source.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 16% of the time

Snyk vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 14% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 12% of the time

SafeGuard Cyber Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 10% of the time

More GitGuardian Platform Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 19% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 14% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform

August 2025

Download GitGuardian Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

August 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

GitGuardian Internal Monitoring, GitGuardian Public Monitoring

No data available

Overview

GitGuardian is an advanced secrets security platform that strengthens Non-Human Identity security and ensures compliance with industry standards by detecting and managing secrets in development environments.

GitGuardian integrates Secrets Security and Secrets Observability, facilitating the detection of compromised secrets and managing legitimate secrets' lifecycle. Supporting over 450 types of secrets, the platform offers public monitoring for leaked data and employs honeytokens as an added defense. Trusted by over 600,000 developers, organizations such as Snowflake and ING rely on GitGuardian for robust secrets protection.

What features define GitGuardian?

Internal Monitoring: Tracks confidential data like IDs and tokens.
Dev in the Loop: Rapid alerts for leaks.
Detection Capabilities: High accuracy with a low false-positive rate.
Integrations: Supports seamless integration with multiple platforms.
Customized Detectors: Offers tailored security solutions.
Multi-Vault Support: Facilitates efficient issue management.

What are the key benefits when evaluating GitGuardian?

Comprehensive Detection: Identifies AWS keys and other hardcoded secrets.
Efficient Remediation: Swiftly resolves issues.
Improved Security: Prevents accidental leaks of sensitive data.
Seamless Integration: Compatible with platforms like GitHub and Azure DevOps.

In sectors like healthcare and telecommunications, GitGuardian is implemented for detecting and managing the exposure of sensitive information in code repositories. Teams benefit from its ability to integrate with platforms such as GitHub, allowing for immediate alerts and efficient remediation of security risks, enhancing application security by safeguarding operational environments.

GitGuardian

OWASP Zap is a free and open-source web application security scanner.

The solution helps developers identify vulnerabilities in their web applications by actively scanning for common security issues.

With its user-friendly interface and powerful features, Zap is a popular choice among developers for ensuring the security of their web applications.

OWASP

Sample Customers

Widely adopted by developer communities, GitGuardian is used by over 600 thousand developers and leading companies, including Snowflake, Orange, Iress, Mirantis, Maven Wave, ING, BASF, and Bouygues Telecom.

1. Google 2. Microsoft 3. IBM 4. Amazon 5. Facebook 6. Twitter 7. LinkedIn 8. Netflix 9. Adobe 10. PayPal 11. Salesforce 12. Cisco 13. Oracle 14. Intel 15. HP 16. Dell 17. VMware 18. Symantec 19. McAfee 20. Citrix 21. Red Hat 22. Juniper Networks 23. SAP 24. Accenture 25. Deloitte 26. Ernst & Young 27. PwC 28. KPMG 29. Capgemini 30. Infosys 31. Wipro 32. TCS

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap

July 2025

Free Report: GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,140 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GitGuardian Platform 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.