"The interface is easy to use."
"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."
"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."
"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."
"Simple to use, good user interface."
"It has evolved over the years and recently in the last year they have added, HUD (Heads Up Display)."
"Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use."
"The solution is scalable."
"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"The Veracode technical support is very good. They are responsive and very knowledgeable."
"My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous."
"Veracode provides guidance for fixing vulnerabilities. It enables developers to write secure code from the start by pointing them to the problematic line of code, and saying, "This function/method has security vulnerabilities," then suggests alternatives to fix it. Then, we adopt their suggestions of the tool. By implementing it in the right way, we can fix the issue. For example, if the tool has found a method where it copied one piece of memory into another piece of memory in the code. The tool points to problematic methods with the vulnerability and provides ways to code it more securely. By adopting their suggestions, we are fixing this vulnerability."
"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."
"The most valuable features are that you can do static analysis and dynamic analysis on a scheduled basis and that you can push the findings into JIRA."
"The dynamic scanning tool is what I like the best. Compared to other tools that I've used for dynamic scanning, it's much faster and easier to use."
"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 solution is unable to customize reports."
"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."
"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."
"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."
"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"The forced browse has been incorporated into the program and it is resource-intensive."
"If the dynamic scan is improved, then the speed might go up. That is somehow not happening. We have raised this concern. It might also help if they could time limit scans to 24 hours instead of letting them go for three days. Then, whatever results could be shared, even if the scan is not complete, that would definitely help us."
"The solution could improve the Dynamic Analysis Security Testing(DAST)."
"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."
"The pricing for qualified startups such as Neo4j could be improved."
"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."
"Third-party library scanning would be very useful to have. When I was researching this a year ago, there was not a third-party library scan available. This would be a nice feature to have because we are now running through some assessments and finding out which tool can do it since this information needs to be captured. Since Veracode is a security solution, this should be related."
"Sometimes the scans are not done quickly, but the solutions that it provides are really good. The quality is high, but the analysis is not done extremely quickly."
"The ideal situation in terms of putting the results in front of the developers would be with Veracode integration into the developer environment (IDE). They do have a plugin, which we've used in the past, but we were not as positive about it."
OWASP ZAP (Zed Attack Proxy) is a free, open-source web application security scanner that enables software developers and testers to perform penetration testing on their applications to discover vulnerabilities and prevent hostile attacks. To date, it is one of the most searched Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP) projects, and an international group of volunteers is maintaining it. This tool is both flexible and extensible and is intended to be used by users who are new to application security as well as expert testers. For the users' convenience, OWASP ZAP has versions for each major OS and Docker platform so as not to rely on any single OS.
OWASP ZAP focuses on being the “middle man proxy,” as it is positioned between the user’s browser and the web application. In doing so, it will intercept and examine messages that are sent between a browser and a web application. If needed, it will adjust the contents and pass those packets on to their destination. As is the case in many corporate settings, if there is already another network proxy in use, ZAP can be configured to join that proxy. A variety of add-ons for further functionality is available on ZAP Marketplace.
OWASP ZAP offers a range of security automation options, including:
Benefits of OWASP ZAP
Some of OWASP ZAP’s benefits include:
Reviews from Real Users
OWASP ZAP stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Among them are the solution’s automatic scanning feature, its ease of use, its ability to report vulnerabilities, and its being a free open-source solution..
PeerSpot user Piyush S., Technical Specialist (DevOps), notes that "Automatic scanning is a valuable feature and very easy to use. The initial setup is straightforward. The solution is free due to the fact that it is open-source. The product has a strong community surrounding it to help with issues and troubleshooting. The stability of the solution is very good."
Raj K., Business Analyst at Experion Technologies, notes, “The valuable features are that it's very simple to use and the user interface is very good, particularly for beginners so they can start the application easily. It's enough to refer to an online tutorial to be able to start using this application. It's not very complex.”
Balaji S., Assistant Vice President at Hexaware Technologies Limited, writes, “The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application. It can help us with security, SQL injection vulnerability, known vulnerabilities, et cetera. Any kind of a threat that we get in the development cycle, is what we will look for. This solution helps us find them.
Many users like how the solution has improved over the years. As Alan G., CEO at Virtual Security International, notes, "It has evolved over the years, and recently in the last year they have added HUD (Heads Up Display)."
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.
Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle.
OWASP Zap is ranked 6th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 10 reviews while Veracode is ranked 1st in Application Security Testing (AST) with 24 reviews. OWASP Zap is rated 7.0, while Veracode is rated 8.0. 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, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Fortify WebInspect and 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.