GitGuardian Platform vs OWASP Zap comparison

GitGuardian and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. GitGuardian is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.8, while OWASP is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.0. GitGuardian holds a 1.0% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 3.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of GitGuardian users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

GitGuardian Platform

Read 32 GitGuardian Platform reviews

6,392 Views
2,365 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 41 OWASP Zap reviews

7,287 Views
6,704 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

GitGuardian Platform

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

OWASP Zap and GitGuardian Platform operate in the field of security management. GitGuardian Platform seems to have the upper hand in features, seen as comprehensive and worth its cost, while OWASP Zap excels in pricing and support.

Features: OWASP Zap is known for its web application testing capabilities, penetration testing tools, and identifying vulnerabilities. GitGuardian Platform excels in detecting sensitive information in code repositories, offering real-time alerts, and robust integrations for securing secrets.

Room for Improvement: OWASP Zap could enhance its integration capabilities and expand its feature set to cover broader security needs. Its user interface could be more intuitive. GitGuardian Platform's setup is more involved due to extensive integrations, which might be streamlined. Additionally, its detection logic could further reduce the minimal false positives related to test data.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap is easy to deploy, tailored for developers, and has efficient customer support. GitGuardian Platform's broader integration options make its setup more complex, yet it provides comprehensive support, which is highly valued.

Pricing and ROI: OWASP Zap is valued for its cost-effective pricing, providing significant ROI in web security. GitGuardian Platform has higher initial costs but is seen as justified by its extensive features, leading to a strong long-term ROI in protecting against secret leaks and enhancing compliance.

To learn more, read our detailed GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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

GitGuardian Platform

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (6th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (8th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (4th), Software Supply Chain Security (5th), DevSecOps (4th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (2nd)

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

10th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of GitGuardian Platform is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 3.5%, down from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
GitGuardian Platform	1.0%
OWASP Zap	3.5%
Other	95.5%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Ney Roman

DevOps Engineer at Deuna App

Facilitates efficient secret management and improves development processes

Regarding the exceptions in GitGuardian Platform, we know that within the platform we have a way to accept a path or a directory from a repository, but it is not that visible at the very beginning. You have to figure out where to search for it, and once you have it, it is really good, but it is not that visible at the beginning. This should be made more exposed. The documentation could be better because it was not that comprehensively documented. When we started working with GitGuardian Platform, it was difficult to find some specific use cases, and we were not aware of that. It might have improved now, but at that time, it was not something we would recommend.

Read full review

Prasant Pokarnaa

Delivery Head - DevOps at Datamato Technologies

Effective vulnerability identification enhances security scans but AI-driven enhancements are needed

OWASP is only meant for two or three different types of scans. It is a tool which will scan the code for security for vulnerabilities We were able to convince the customers to really remove those rules when GitLab was able to show the results. Customers should be aware that GitLab is not just a…

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

"A high number of our exposures are remediated by developers before security needs to step in, as the self-healing playbook process engages them automatically. This results in issues being resolved within minutes, saving significant effort from the security team in tracking down or communicating with developers."

"GitGuardian Platform has helped save significant time for the security team by eliminating the need to seek out development teams and work with them on exposed secrets, as much of this is now handled proactively."

"GitGuardian Internal Monitoring has helped increase our secrets detection rate by several orders of magnitude. This is a hard metric to get. For example, if we knew what our secrets were and where they were, we wouldn't need GitGuardian or these types of solutions. There could be a million more secrets that GitGuardian doesn't detect, but it is basically impossible to find them by searching for them."

"GitGuardian public leak detection significantly enhances our organization's data security by continuously monitoring public repositories."

"One thing I really like about it is the fact that we can add search words or specific payloads inside the tool, and GitGuardian will look into GitHub and alert us if any of these words is found in a repository... With this capability in the tool, we have good surveillance over our potential blind spots."

"The breadth of the solution detection capabilities is pretty good. They have good categories and a lot of different types of secrets... it gives us a great range when it comes to types of secrets, and that's good for us."

"The most valuable feature is its ability to automate both downloading the repository and generating a Software Bill of Materials directly from it."

"What I appreciate the most about GitGuardian Platform is its efficiency when triggering our pipeline and notifying us if secrets have been exposed, such as APIs, variables, our database, or anything being exposed."

More GitGuardian Platform pros

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

"The product helps users to scan and fix vulnerabilities in the pipeline."

"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."

"It has improved my organization with faster security tests."

"The scalability of this product is very good."

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

"I consider OWASP Zap to be the most effective solution overall; being open source allows integration with other systems via OWASP Zap APIs."

"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"GitGuardian's hook and dashboard scanners are the two entities. They should work together as one. We've seen several discrepancies where the hook is not being flagged on the dashboard. I still think they need to do some fine-tuning around that. We don't want to waste time."

"The main thing for me is the customization for some of the healthcare-specific identifiers that we want to validate. There should be some ability, which is coming in the near future, to have custom identifiers. Being in healthcare, we have pretty specific patterns that we need to match for PHI or PII. Having that would add a little bit extra to it."

"I'm excited about the possibility of Public Postman scanning being integrated with GitGuardian in the future. Additionally, I'm interested in exploring the potential use of honeytokens, which seems like a compelling approach to lure and identify attackers."

"If a developer commits code into their repo, it generates an alert. The alert comes into Slack, but by the time someone looks at it through the Slack alerting channel, the developer might have gone and already fixed or closed the issue. There's no sort of feedback loop to come back into the notification channel to show that it's been addressed."

"It could be easier. They have a CLI tool that engineers can run on their laptops, but getting engineers to install the tool is a manual process. I would like to see them have it integrated into one of those developer tools, e.g., VS Code or JetBrains, so developers don't have to think about it."

"It would be nice if they supported detecting PII or had some kind of data loss prevention feature."

"GitGuardian encompasses many secrets that companies might have, but we are a Microsoft-only organization, so there are some limitations there in terms of their honey tokens. I'd like for it to not be limited to Amazon-based tokens. It would be nice to see a broader set of providers that you could pick from."

"Right now, we are waiting for improvement in the RBAC support for GitGuardian."

More GitGuardian Platform cons

"The automated vulnerability assessments that the application performs needs to be simplified as well as diversified."

"Sometimes, we get some false positives."

"There isn't too much information about it online."

"The ability to search the internet for other use cases and to use the solution to make applications more secure should be addressed."

"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."

"The port scanner is a little too slow."

"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."

"I'd like to see a kind of feature where we can just track what our last vulnerability was and how it has improved or not. More reports that can have some kind of base-lining, I think that would be a good feature too. I'm not sure whether it can be achieved and implement but I think that would really help."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"With GitGuardian, we didn't need any middlemen."

"The pricing for GitGuardian is fair."

"It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are very happy with the value we get."

"I compared the solution to a couple of other solutions, and I think it is very competitively priced."

"It's a little bit expensive."

"We have seen a return on investment. The amount of time that we would have spent manually doing this definitely outpaces the cost of GitGuardian. It is saving us about $35,000 a year, so I would say the ROI is about $20,000 a year."

"It's fairly priced, as it performs a lot of analysis and is a valuable tool."

"The pricing is reasonable. GitGuardian is one of the most recent security tools we've adopted. When it came time to renew it, there was no doubt about it. It is licensed per developer, so it scales nicely with the number of repos that we have. We can create new repositories and break up work. It isn't scaling based on the amount of data it's consuming."

More GitGuardian Platform pricing and cost advice

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

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

"The tool is open-source."

"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."

"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."

"This solution is open source and free."

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."

More OWASP Zap pricing and cost advice

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

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

16%

Comms Service Provider

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

13%

University

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	9
Large Enterprise	13

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

It's also worth mentioning that GitGuardian is unique because they have a free tier that we've been using for the first twelve months. It provides full functionality for smaller teams. We're a smal...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

It's competitively priced compared to others. Overall, the secret detection sector is expensive, but we are happy with the value we get.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitGuardian Internal Monitoring ?

GitGuardian Platform does what it is designed to do, but it still generates many false positives. We utilize the automated playbooks from GitGuardian Platform, and we are enhancing them. We will pr...

See all answers

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

Comparisons

SafeGuard Cyber Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 6% of the time

Snyk vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 6% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs GitGuardian Platform

Compared 4% of the time

More GitGuardian Platform Competitors

SonarQube vs OWASP Zap

Compared 15% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 14% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs OWASP Zap

Compared 8% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform

January 2026

Download GitGuardian Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

January 2026

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

GitGuardian Internal Monitoring, GitGuardian Public Monitoring

No data available

Interactive Demo

GitGuardian

Demo not available

OWASP

Overview

GitGuardian is a comprehensive platform focused on enhancing Non-Human Identity security by integrating Secrets Security and Secrets Observability to detect and manage secrets across development environments.

As cybersecurity threats increasingly target NHIs like service accounts and applications, GitGuardian offers a robust solution by supporting over 450 types of secrets and deploying honeytokens for additional defense. Trusted by leading organizations and developers, its monitoring and quick alert system enable effective detection and management of sensitive data, strengthening operational security across platforms.

What are the key features of GitGuardian?

Secrets Detection: Identifies various secrets types such as AWS keys and passwords.
Quick Alerts: Provides timely notifications for immediate risk management.
Integration: Seamlessly integrates with development tools and workflows.
Dev in the Loop: Facilitates rapid issue resolution.
Historical Scanning: Enhances security through thorough scanning practices.

What benefits and ROI should companies consider?

Efficiency: Streamlined remediation processes with minimal false positives.
Customizability: Adaptable detection features cater to specific needs.
Risk Reduction: Proactive management of sensitive data threats.
Team Integration: Improved collaboration through connected workflows.
Development Continuity: Maintains seamless operation during security processes.

In the tech industry, GitGuardian is employed to safeguard APIs and sensitive credentials across code repositories like GitHub. Companies benefit from instant alerts and integrations with tools like Slack, effectively managing risks and enhancing security policies. While popular in sectors dependent on development agility, there is room for further improvement in customization and integration to meet specific industry needs.

GitGuardian

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

Sample Customers

Widely adopted by developer communities, GitGuardian is used by over 600 thousand developers and leading companies, including Snowflake, Orange, Iress, Mirantis, Maven Wave, ING, BASF, and Bouygues Telecom.

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

Buyer's Guide

GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap

February 2026

Free Report: GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GitGuardian Platform vs. OWASP Zap report.

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.