We performed a comparison between OWASP Zap and Rapid7 InsightAppSec based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has tightened our security."
"The API is exceptional."
"The application scanning feature is the most valuable feature."
"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."
"You can run it against multiple targets."
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"It scans while you navigate, then you can save the requests performed and work with them later."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"You have various attack modules, and you also have the Attack Replay feature for the attack sequence. You can reproduce an attack and see it. That is a very good feature I noticed in this solution. It helps developers as well."
"In Rapid7 InsightAppSec, a distinctive feature is the provision of a CDM for integrating web servers and web applications. To establish the connection between these applications, you only need to paste the provided CDN into your metadata. Once connected, every piece of information, including vulnerabilities, can be accessed. It also offers demo sessions."
"It's very easy to use and user-friendly. It does the job."
"It is very convenient to get reports from the tool, which offers high-level environmental statistics."
"We have seen measurable decrease in the mean time to respond to threats by 20 percent."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the graphical interface."
"The product’s most valuable feature is UI. It is easy to manage and find vulnerabilities in the application."
"The initial setup for us was easy enough. We didn't face too many issues. Deployment took maybe 30 minutes. It's quite quick and doesn't cause too much trouble at the outset."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."
"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."
"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."
"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."
"The solution is unable to customize reports."
"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."
"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange. They need to work a little bit more on their interface to make it more understandable. The interface is the only problem. I'm using Rapid7, which is very intuitive. There are other applications available in the market with a better interface. They can include more techniques or options to test different types of security because the templates are limited. It would be great to see them follow the MITRE ATT&CK framework or what is there in tools like Veracode and Synopsys."
"I would like more details of what the product can do."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement in detecting phishing pages."
"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work. We found that we'd try to use widgets, but often getting them to work for us wasn't very clear. They need to be more user friendly or offer better instructions."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
"We get a lot of false positives during the tests."
"In the future, if they can have integration with a lot of ticketing systems then it would be amazing."
OWASP Zap is ranked 8th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 36 reviews while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is ranked 3rd in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) with 12 reviews. OWASP Zap is rated 7.6, while Rapid7 InsightAppSec is rated 8.6. 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 Rapid7 InsightAppSec writes "A highly scalable and robust product that enables users to automate scans". OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning and Rapid7 AppSpider, whereas Rapid7 InsightAppSec is most compared with Rapid7 AppSpider, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Fortify WebInspect, Acunetix and Qualys Web Application Scanning. See our OWASP Zap vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec report.
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.