OWASP Zap vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?

OWASP and Keysight Technologies are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Additionally, 88% of OWASP users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Keysight Technologies users who would recommend it.

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

9,744 Views
9,062 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Read 5 Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] reviews

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 22, 2025

Spirent CyberFlood and OWASP Zap compete in cybersecurity testing tools. OWASP Zap holds an advantage due to its open-source model, making it cost-effective, despite Spirent CyberFlood's specific use case strengths.

Features: Spirent CyberFlood offers comprehensive traffic generation, testing compliance, and flexible scheduling, ideal for diverse attack simulations. OWASP Zap provides robust web application scanning, automation options like automated scanning and crawling, and extensive vulnerability detection, ensuring simplified web security management.

Room for Improvement: Spirent CyberFlood could enhance ease of use and setup complexity, as its structured deployment is resource-intensive. Simplifying user interface and providing more accessible community support would be beneficial for users transitioning to or from other solutions. OWASP Zap might improve by expanding its attack vector support beyond web applications, integrating more intuitive user interfaces, and providing more structured professional assistance for enterprises.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap's open-source nature facilitates agile deployment with robust community support, making setup straightforward. Spirent CyberFlood requires a structured deployment process and professional support, potentially challenging due to its complexity, yet beneficial for businesses needing personalized assistance.

Pricing and ROI: Spirent CyberFlood includes significant initial costs for its extensive capabilities, promising ROI through in-depth assessments. In contrast, OWASP Zap provides high ROI as an open-source tool with minimal setup expenses, highly appealing for budget-conscious buyers.

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: October 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

October 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 917,433 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

OWASP Zap

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (15th)

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

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

Jos Badimo

Director at BAMS

Test assurance improves compliance and products with good performance

The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation. The most significant issue I encounter with the solution is the user interface. It would be beneficial if I could remain on one screen most of the time. Even if the system navigates me to another screen, it should effectively return me to the main screen.

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

"The application scanning feature is the most valuable feature."

"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 to use, good user interface."

"OWASP is definitely in the top three as a tool that we would probably recommend to our team, as a frequent users' tool, however, I don't believe we have any kind of a formal relationship with the company."

"OWASP Zap is straightforward to use. If someone doesn't have the budget for tools like Burp Suite, OWASP Zap is an excellent alternative."

"The HUD, Heads Up Display, is a good feature; it provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."

"The solution enables a person to add the certificate and check the queries, to see if there are any that are undefined, so a person can have a list of the types of queries and can trace them."

More OWASP Zap pros

"CyberFlood is bundled and basic, but it's still powerful and easy to use, and I would recommend it, especially for beginners."

"The feature I find most valuable is the traffic generator."

"The testing compliance feature is particularly impressive."

"If any customer doubts their existing network security policy this is a perfect product to analyze their network security and even existing processes."

"Our customers use it to check for unauthorized file transfer."

"CyberFlood's best features are its user-friendliness and scheduling function."

"CyberFlood is flexible."

Cons

"The solution is somewhat unreliable because after we get the finding, we have to manually verify each of its findings to see whether it's a false positive or a true finding, and it takes time."

"The port scanner is a little too slow."

"I'd also like to see an improvement in test reports because we get too many false positives."

"It would be ideal if I could try some pre-built deployment scenarios so that I don't have to worry about whether the configuration sector team is doing it right or wrong. That would be very helpful."

"It's possibly just a limitation of the product itself but sometimes it won't scan a particular website so you have to manually go in and make some configuration changes."

"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."

"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."

"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."

More OWASP Zap cons

"The user interface could be improved to facilitate easier navigation."

"I would also like to see updates on a more frequent schedule."

"CyberFlood's accessibility and support for multiple browsers could be better."

"Sometimes, when you configure parameters the hardware can't run, it will get stuck at those points without telling you what happened. It would be helpful if the error reporting provided more details about why the test setting is not running. It would be nice if there were a space in the hardware module for you to add some external hardware for more rigorous testing."

"The initial setup is not straightforward and can be quite challenging."

"The solution needs more ports, more speed, and more gigabytes."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is open source."

"The tool is open-source."

"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."

"This solution is open source and free."

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

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"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."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

"CyberFlood is reasonably priced."

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

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

University

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

Outsourcing Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	22

No data available

Questions from the Community

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 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

What needs improvement with OWASP Zap?

The improvement that has to be done for APIs focuses on manual activities where the feature exists, but it is not at the same level as what Burp Suite does with intercepting and tools such as Postm...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Spirent CyberFlood?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Spirent CyberFlood?

I have been using the solution for a year now. The customers I work with are focused on both custom test assurance and test automation. The solution is utilized in the financial services sector and...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Spirent CyberFlood?

The language barrier and time difference pose significant issues with customer support. The price is competitive. The biggest benefits I find are test assurance, the reliability of the test results...

See all answers

Comparisons

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Invicti Web + API vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 7% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 6% of the time

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 5% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

HCL AppScan vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 6% of the time

Sqreen vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

Invicti Web + API vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

GitLab vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

Snyk vs Spirent CyberFlood [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

More Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

October 2026

Download OWASP Zap product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

October 2026

Download Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] product report

Also Known As

No data available

CyberFlood Virtual, Spirent Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing, Mu Dynamics Application Security Testing

Overview

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

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] effectively minimizes network monitoring tasks with its impressive traffic generator and call flow function. Known for its user-friendliness, it supports network security testing and compliance across public and private clouds for large enterprises.

Users find Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] beneficial for comprehensive security evaluations, particularly in compliance and product testing. Its capabilities in generating SSL traffic assist in cybersecurity assessments, demonstrating flexibility and ease of use. The platform supports custom test assurance and automation, allowing financial and public sectors to enhance their cybersecurity measures. Despite its advantages, users desire improvements in ports, speed, multilingual support, browser accessibility, error reporting, and interface navigation.

What features does Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] offer?

Traffic Generator: Minimizes network monitoring tasks effectively.
Call Flow Function: Simplifies network processes for better management.
User-Friendliness: Enhances scheduling and usage efficiency.
Compliance Testing: Aids in product and compliance examinations.
Unauthorized File Transfer Monitoring: Ensures superior compliance performance.

What benefits should be considered in user reviews?

Flexibility: Supports diverse network security testing scenarios.
Performance: Delivers reliable compliance enforcement capabilities.
Comprehensive Testing: Addresses small to large enterprise security needs.
Enhanced Automation: Benefits public and financial sectors for test assurance.

Spirent CyberFlood [EOL] is instrumental in enterprise environments within public and private sectors, offering robust network security testing and automation support. Large enterprises in financial industries utilize it to ensure cybersecurity standards, especially in cloud environments.

Keysight Technologies

Sample Customers

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

Digicel

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

October 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: October 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.