OWASP Top 10 2021 Coverity can also generate a report based on the 2021 Top 10. The OWASP Top 10 for 2021 include the following ca... owasp https://owasp.org OWASP Code Review Guide OWASP Code Review Guide is a technical book written for those responsible for code reviews (management, developers, security profe... GitHub https://github.com OWASP dep-scan is a next-generation security ... - GitHub Introduction. OWASP dep-scan is a next-generation security and risk audit tool based on known vulnerabilities, advisories, and lic... AquilaX https://aquilax.ai AI Code Review: Automated Security Review Model - AquilaX Continuous retraining loop. The Review model is retrained on a daily schedule using new labelled data from the AquilaX feedback sy... owasp https://owasp.org OWASP VISTO (Vulnerability Intelligence & Security Testing ... OWASP VISTO (Vulnerability Intelligence & Security Testing Orchestrator) * Systematically Conduct Pentests: Ensure a consistent an... GitHub https://github.com index.md - OWASP/www-project-code-review-guide - GitHub Apr 11, 2025 —
To provide a truly useful review of an OWASP scanner, it is important to clarify that "OWASP" is not a tool itself, but a foundation. Most people searching for an "OWASP scanner" are looking for OWASP ZAP (Zed Attack Proxy) , which is the foundation's flagship free and open-source tool. However, others might be referring to tools that test for the OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities (like Burp Suite, SonarQube, or Nessus). Below is a comprehensive, unbiased review of OWASP ZAP , followed by a comparison with its main competitor, Burp Suite , to help you decide which is right for you.
Product Review: OWASP ZAP (Zed Attack Proxy) Verdict: The Best Free Security Tool for DevOps and CI/CD Pipelines The Basics
License: Open Source (Completely Free). Maintainer: OWASP Foundation. Primary Use: Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Target Audience: Developers, DevOps engineers, Penetration Testers, and Security Beginners. owasp scanner
The Good (Pros) 1. Unbeatable Price-to-Value Ratio ZAP is entirely free. For a tool that offers automated scanning, an intercepting proxy, and API testing, this is incredible value. It lowers the barrier to entry for security testing significantly compared to paid tools that can cost thousands per year. 2. Exceptional CI/CD Integration This is ZAP’s "superpower." Unlike many commercial tools that are built for manual GUI use, ZAP is designed with automation in mind. It has excellent Docker images and command-line features.
Use Case: You can easily plug ZAP into a Jenkins, GitHub Actions, or GitLab pipeline to automatically scan your staging environment every time you push code.
3. The "HUD" (Heads Up Display) ZAP offers a unique HUD that overlays the web application you are testing directly in your browser. This allows you to see security alerts and send requests to the scanner without constantly switching back and forth between your browser and the proxy window. It is fantastic for beginners. 4. Extensibility (Marketplace) ZAP has a robust add-on marketplace. If the base scanner misses something (like a specific framework vulnerability), there is likely a free add-on created by the community that adds that functionality. 5. Active Community Because it is open-source, there are thousands of tutorials, YouTube videos, and StackOverflow threads. If you get stuck, the answer is usually a Google search away. The Bad (Cons) 1. High False Positive Rate Automated scanners generally struggle with false positives, but ZAP can be particularly chatty. It will often flag "X-Frame-Options" missing or "Cookie No HttpOnly Flag" as high severity, even when they might be low risk in your specific context. It requires manual verification of results. 2. Steeper Learning Curve for Manual Testing While the automated scan is easy, using ZAP as a manual proxy (like an interceptor) can feel clunky. The UI is functional but dated. The workflow for things like "Match and Replace" or decoding complex tokens is often less intuitive than in commercial competitors. 3. Slower Scanning Engine Compared to premium tools like Burp Suite Pro or Acunetix, ZAP’s active scanner can be slower. It may struggle with very large applications with thousands of endpoints, requiring careful tuning of the scope to finish in a reasonable time. 4. The "OWASP Top 10" Limitation ZAP is excellent at finding "low-hanging fruit" (common mistakes like SQL Injection, XSS, missing headers). However, it is not a silver bullet. It will not find complex logic flaws (e.g., "User A can delete User B's account by changing an ID parameter") or sophisticated authentication bypasses that require human intuition. OWASP Top 10 2021 Coverity can also generate
Comparison: OWASP ZAP vs. Burp Suite Pro This is the most common decision point for security professionals. | Feature | OWASP ZAP | Burp Suite Professional | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Cost | Free | ~$450/year per user | | Automation | Excellent (Built for CI/CD) | Good (Requires Enterprise license for full CI/CD) | | Manual Testing | Good, but UI can be clunky | Excellent. The "Repeater" and "Repeater" tabs are industry standards. | | Scanning Speed | Slower, resource-heavy | Generally faster and more efficient. | | False Positives | Higher | Lower (Better heuristics) | | Learning Curve | Moderate | Moderate to High | Recommendation:
Choose OWASP ZAP if: You are a developer wanting to add security scans to your pipeline, you have a limited budget, or you are learning web security. Choose Burp Suite if: You are a professional penetration tester who spends 8 hours a day manually testing applications. The UI speed and manual tooling in Burp save time that justifies the cost.
Summary: Is it worth using? Yes, absolutely. OWASP ZAP is a "Must-Have" tool. GitHub https://github
For Companies: Do not pay for expensive DAST tools until you have fully utilized ZAP in your CI/CD pipeline. It catches the majority of easy-to-fix vulnerabilities for free. For Individuals: It is the best training ground for learning how web attacks work without paying a subscription fee.
Rating: 8.5/10 (Docked points for UI clunkiness and scan speed, but earns massive points for accessibility and automation capabilities.)