No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OWASP Zap vs Ox Security comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
12th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ox Security
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
21st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (11th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of OWASP Zap is 2.5%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ox Security is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OWASP Zap2.5%
Ox Security1.2%
Other96.3%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Ravishankar Prakash - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud & Devsecops Lead Engineer at Aon Corporation
Integrated workflows have transformed security reviews and provide end-to-end risk visibility
The best features that Ox Security offers include real-time visibility and actionable intelligence. Also, I love the intuitive interface and seamless integrations. Regarding the features of Ox Security, I love the pipeline functionality, which allows the creation of customized workflows based on scan results, making prevention and notification processes highly adaptable. I also love the visibility it provides, which is end-to-end security visibility covering the entire development lifecycle from code writing and storage to security testing, deployment, and infrastructure management. I also love its powerful pipeline system, which enables us to automate notifications to relevant teams based on issue origin and type while also enforcing security policies by blocking new code when prohibited issue types are detected. The intuitive interface makes it easy to pinpoint vulnerabilities early, prioritize critical issues, and streamline remediation processes. The seamless integration with existing DevOps tools ensures that security insights flow naturally into development workflows without creating bottlenecks. I also love the real-time visibility and actionable intelligence. It fosters a security-first mindset, boosting both the confidence of my development team and the overall resilience of our applications. Regarding Ox Security's AI capabilities, I find its governance and security capabilities to be very strong, particularly in helping us identify risks and maintaining visibility across the software development process. I also value the focus on data protection, access control, and responsible use of AI. The AI capabilities are generally accurate and reliable, especially in helping us identify vulnerabilities and highlighting potential risks very easily. They help us reduce manual effort and speed up security reviews.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"This solution has improved my organization because it has made us feel safer doing frequent deployments for web applications. If we have something really big, we might get some professional company in to help us but if we're releasing small products, we will check it ourselves with Zap. It makes it easier and safer."
"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the spidering because, being a security person, it is very important for me to know each and every section of that application, so we cannot afford to miss any single web page or any single link on a particular website."
"I consider OWASP Zap to be the most effective solution overall; being open source allows integration with other systems via OWASP Zap APIs."
"OWASP Zap is a good tool, one of my favorites for a long time, and I would recommend it."
"Zap is an open-source and sophisticated product that not only saves us money but also provides us with a good amount of information."
"The seamless integration with existing DevOps tools ensures that security insights flow naturally into development workflows without creating bottlenecks."
"Ox Security has positively impacted my organization by helping to reduce the amount of noise we received from vulnerabilities because of the prioritization scoring it has and all of the context it provides."
"As a service provider, I believe the biggest advantage of Ox Security is its simplicity and the clarity of the issues, along with a very good dashboard showing the state of the company."
 

Cons

"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."
"Deployment is somewhat complicated."
"Without any support, we are in a black hole sometimes."
"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."
"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."
"The technical support team must be proactive."
"They stopped their support for a short period. They've recently started to come back again. In the early days, support was much better."
"My overall review rating for Ox Security is zero."
"One area that Ox Security could improve is the dashboard customization and reporting."
"The main pain point I have with Ox Security as a tool is the user interface, which can feel quite complex when navigating large datasets."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"This solution is open source and free."
"The tool is open source."
"This is an open-source solution and can be used free of charge."
"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Educational Organization
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise22
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 ...
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.
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...
What needs improvement with Ox Security?
I'm not sure about flexibility because I didn't try it, so I can't comment on that, but as far as I understand, most of Ox Security is not personalized. I think that most of the tool is quite deter...
What is your primary use case for Ox Security?
I worked with Ox Security as a service provider, not as a representative, but as a user. I use it in my employee capacity, providing services to companies in Israel, and one of them is an insurance...
What advice do you have for others considering Ox Security?
Regarding threat detection capability, I think that Ox Security is not used for that matter. The CISO mainly focuses on dev sec ops rather than runtime security or real-time security. I figure that...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

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
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Ox Security and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.