OWASP Zap vs Synopsys Defensics comparison

The compared OWASP and Black Duck solutions aren't in the same category. OWASP is ranked #11 in SAST , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 4.6% mindshare in the category. Black Duck is ranked #5 in FTT , and holds a 22.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of OWASP users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Black Duck users who would recommend it.

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

8,776 Views
507 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Synopsys Defensics

Read 4 Synopsys Defensics reviews

124 Views
24 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Synopsys Defensics

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OWASP Zap and Synopsys Defensics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,632 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) (11th)

Synopsys Defensics

Average Rating

8.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Fuzz Testing Tools (5th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OWASP Zap is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 4.6%, down 4.8% compared to last year.
Synopsys Defensics, on the other hand, focuses on Fuzz Testing Tools, holds 22.1% mindshare, up 15.4% since last year.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Fuzz Testing Tools

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

Sarath Kumar Choday

Senior Technical Lead at HCL Technologies

Product security tests for switches and router sections

Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install. What I see in the documentation isn't that. Even if something doesn't malfunction, sometimes it is hard to install and execute. The product needs video documentation. This would help a lot more.

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."

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

"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."

"Fuzzer and Java APIs help a lot with our custom needs."

"You can run it against multiple targets."

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

"They offer free access to some other tools."

"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, it's very difficult."

More OWASP Zap pros

"We have found multiple issues in our embedded system network protocols, related to buffer overflow. We have reduced some of these issues."

"Whatever the test suit they give, it is intelligent. It will understand the protocol and it will generate the test cases based on the protocol: protocol, message sequence, protocol, message structure... Because of that, we can eliminate a lot of unwanted test cases, so we can execute the tests and complete them very quickly."

"The product is related to US usage with TLS contact fees, i.e. how more data center connections will help lower networking costs."

Cons

"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."

"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."

"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."

"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms. They should expand their capabilities for broader coverage of business logic flaws and complex issues."

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

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

"The product should allow users to customize the report based on their needs."

"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."

More OWASP Zap cons

"Codenomicon Defensics should be more advanced for the testing sector. It should be somewhat easy and flexible to install."

"Sometimes, when we are testing embedded devices, when we trigger the test cases, the target will crash immediately. It is very difficult for us to identify the root cause of the crash because they do not provide sophisticated tools on the target side. They cover only the client-side application... They do not have diagnostic tools for the target side. Rather, they have them but they are very minimal and not very helpful."

"It does not support the complete protocol stack. There are some IoT protocols that are not supported and new protocols that are not supported."

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"The tool is open-source."

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

"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."

"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."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

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

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

"Licensing is a bit expensive."

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

860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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 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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 19% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 16% 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

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 32% of the time

HCL AppScan vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 12% of the time

Snyk vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 12% of the time

Veracode vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 11% of the time

Coverity vs Synopsys Defensics

Compared 10% of the time

More Synopsys Defensics Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

June 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Buyer's Guide

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs. Synopsys Defensics

June 2025

Download Synopsys Defensics product report

Also Known As

No data available

Defensics, Codenomicon Defensics

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

Defensics® fuzz testing is a comprehensive, powerful, and automated black box solution that enables organizations to effectively and efficiently discover and remediate security weaknesses in software. By taking a systematic and intelligent approach to negative testing, Defensics allows organizations to ensure software security without compromising on product innovation, increasing time to market, or inflating operational costs.

Black Duck

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

Coriant, CERT-FI, Next Generation Networks

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

June 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.