We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OWASP Zap Logo
31,876 views|21,072 comparisons
Veracode Logo
60,232 views|33,073 comparisons
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
563,148 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
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display).""The solution is scalable.""The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application.""The interface is easy to use.""They offer free access to some other tools.""Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use.""The stability of the solution is very good.""Simple to use, good user interface."

More OWASP Zap Pros →

"It is SaaS hosted. That makes it very convenient to use. There is no initial time needed to set up an application. Scanning is a matter of minutes. You just log in, create an application profile, associate a security configuration, and that's about it. It takes 10 minutes to start. The lack of initial lead time or initial overhead to get going is the primary advantage.""There is a single area on the dashboard where you can get a full view of all of the tests and the results from everything. There is a nice, very simple graphic that shows you the types of vulnerabilities that were found, their severity, the scoring, and in what part of the code they were found. All the details are together in one place.""In terms of secure development, the SAST scan is very useful because we are able to identify security flaws in the code base itself, for the application.""The static scan is the feature that we use the most, as it gives us insight into our source code. We have it integrated with our continuous integration, continuous delivery system, so we can get insight quickly.""My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous.""Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers.""Veracode is a valuable tool in our secure SDLC process.""The reporting being highly accurate is pretty cool. I use another product and I was always looking for answers as to what line, which part of the code, was wrong, and what to do about it. Veracode seems to have a solid database to look things up and a website to look things up."

More Veracode Pros →

Cons
"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.""The ability to search the internet for other use cases and to use the solution to make applications more secure should be addressed.""Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long.""Too many false positives; test reports could be improved.""It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool.""The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive.""Deployment is somewhat complicated.""The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."

More OWASP Zap Cons →

"The feature that allows me to read which mitigation answer was submitted, and to approve it, requires me to use do so in different screens. That makes it a little bit more complicated because I have to read and then I have to go back and make sure it falls under the same number ID number. That part is a little bit complicated from my perspective, because that's what I use the most.""Veracode has plenty of data. The problem is the information on the dashboards of Veracode, as the user interface is not great. It's not immediately usable. Most of the time, the best way to use it is to just create issues and put them in JIRA... But if I were a startup, and only had products with a good user interface, I wouldn't use Veracode because the UI is very dated.""I would like to see them provide more content in the developer training section. This field is really changing each day and there are flaws that are detected each day. Some sort of regular updates to the learning would help.""I think for us the biggest improvement would be to have an indicator when there's something wrong with a scan.""Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights.""The policies you have, where you can tune the findings you get, don't allow you not to file tickets about certain findings. It will always report the findings, even if you know you're not that concerned about a library writing to a system log, for example. It will keep raising them, even though you may have a ticket about it. The integration will keep updating the ticket every time the scan runs.""The pricing for qualified startups such as Neo4j could be improved.""One feature I would like would be more selectivity in email alerts. While I like getting these, I would like to be able to be more granular in which ones I receive."

More Veracode Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
  • "This solution is open source and free."
  • More OWASP Zap Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "For the value we get out of it, coupled with the live defect review sessions, we find it an effective value for the money. We are a larger organization."
  • "I don't really know about the pricing, but I'd say it's worth whatever Veracode is charging, because the solution is that good."
  • "Veracode's price is high. I would like them to better optimize their pricing."
  • "If I compare the pricing with other software tools, then it is quite competitive. Whatever the price is, they have always given us a good discount."
  • "Veracode is expensive. Some of its products are expensive. I don't think it's way more expensive than its competitors. The dynamic is definitely worth it, as I think it's cheaper than the competitors. The static scan is a little bit more expensive, around 20 percent more expensive. The manual pen test is more expensive, but it is an expensive service because it's a manual pen test and we also do retests. I don't think it is way more expensive than the competitors, but it's about 15 to 20 percent more expensive."
  • "We use this product per project rather than per developer... Your development model will really determine what the best fit is for you in terms of licensing, because of the project-based licensing. If you do a few projects, that's more attractive. If you have a large number of developers, that would also make the product a little more attractive."
  • "The pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."
  • "It is very reasonably priced compared to what we were paying our previous vendor. For the same price, we are getting much more value and reducing our AppSec costs from 40 to 50 percent."
  • More Veracode Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Testing (AST) solutions are best for your needs.
    563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    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… more »
    Top Answer: 
    It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display).
    Top Answer: 
    SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use… more »
    Top Answer: 
    There is a single area on the dashboard where you can get a full view of all of the tests and the results from everything. There is a nice, very simple graphic that shows you the types of… more »
    Top Answer: 
    I was impressed with the pricing we got from Veracode. I was able to make it work very well within our budget.
    Ranking
    Views
    31,876
    Comparisons
    21,072
    Reviews
    9
    Average Words per Review
    471
    Rating
    7.0
    Views
    60,232
    Comparisons
    33,073
    Reviews
    24
    Average Words per Review
    1,372
    Rating
    8.1
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    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 covers all your Application Security needs in one solution through a combination of five analysis types; static analysis, dynamic analysis, software composition analysis, interactive application security testing, and penetration testing. Unlike on-premise solutions that are hard to scale and focused on finding rather than fixing, Veracode comprises a unique combination of SaaS technology and on-demand expertise that enables DevSecOps through integration with your pipeline, and empowers developers to find and fix security defects.

    Offer
    Learn more about OWASP Zap
    Keep your software secure

    Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.

    Sample Customers
    Information Not Available
    State of Missouri, Rekner
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company27%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Retailer9%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company30%
    Comms Service Provider25%
    Government6%
    Financial Services Firm5%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm30%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company29%
    Comms Service Provider17%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise32%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise71%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise25%
    Large Enterprise51%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise30%
    Large Enterprise45%
    Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OWASP Zap is ranked 6th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 9 reviews while Veracode is ranked 1st in Application Security Testing (AST) with 24 reviews. OWASP Zap is rated 7.0, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great at reporting vulnerabilities, helps with security, and reveals development threats well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Good reporting, comprehensive interface, and integrates well into our build pipeline". OWASP Zap is most compared with PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional, Acunetix by Invicti, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Fortify WebInspect and Netsparker by Invicti, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx, Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, Coverity and HCL AppScan. See our OWASP Zap vs. Veracode report.

    See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.

    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.