Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

OWASP Zap vs OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing comparison

 

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

OpenText Dynamic Applicatio...
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (3rd), DevSecOps (10th)
OWASP Zap
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 22.8%, down 31.3% compared to last year.
OWASP Zap, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 4.7% mindshare, down 4.9% since last year.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Navin N - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective scanning of diverse file extensions with fast reporting and issue resolution
We develop software packages for clients, and these clients are mostly in the BFSI sector. The packages need to be scanned, and we engage Fortify WebInspect for this.  Customers typically perform their own application pen tests, but in some cases, we have engagements where customers want us to scan…
Amit Beniwal - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reporting, centralized dashboard, and bird's eye view of all vulnerabilities are the most valuable features."
"The user interface is ok and it is very simple to use."
"There are lots of small settings and tools, like an HTTP editor, that are very useful."
"Good at scanning and finding vulnerabilities."
"The tool provides comprehensive vulnerability assessments which help ensure our deliverables are as free from vulnerabilities as possible. It has also streamlined our web application vulnerability assessments, assisting us in delivering secure applications to our clients."
"Fortify WebInspect is a scalable solution, it is good for a lot of applications."
"The most valuable feature is the static analysis."
"Guided Scan option allows us to easily scan and share reports."
"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."
"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."
"The reporting is quite intuitive, which gives you a clear indication of what kind of vulnerability you have that you can drill down on to gather more information."
"You can run it against multiple targets."
"The stability of the solution is very good."
"The scalability of this product is very good."
"The product discovers more vulnerabilities compared to other tools."
"The interface is easy to use."
 

Cons

"Lately, we've seen more false negatives."
"We have often encountered scanning errors."
"It took us between eight and ten hours to scan an entire site, which is somewhat slow and something that I think can be improved."
"Our biggest complaint about this product is that it freezes up, and literally doesn't work for us."
"We have had a problem with authentification."
"Not sufficiently compatible with some of our systems."
"One thing I would like to see them introduce is a cloud-based platform."
"There are some file extensions, like .SER, that Fortify WebInspect doesn't scan."
"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."
"The reporting feature could be more descriptive."
"They stopped their support for a short period. They've recently started to come back again. In the early days, support was much better."
"I would like to see a version of “repeater” within OWASP ZAP, a tool capable of sending from one to 1000 of the same requests, but with preselected modified fields, changing from a predetermined word ​list, or manually created."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"The technical support team must be proactive."
"OWASP should work on reducing false positives by using AI and ML algorithms. They should expand their capabilities for broader coverage of business logic flaws and complex issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is very expensive."
"Its price is almost similar to the price of AppScan. Both of them are very costly. Its price could be reduced because it can be very costly for unlimited IT scans, etc. I'm not sure, but it can go up to $40,000 to $50,000 or more than that."
"Our licensing is such that you can only run one scan at a time, which is inconvenient."
"Fortify WebInspect is a very expensive product."
"The pricing is not clear and while it is not high, it is difficult to understand."
"The price is okay."
"It’s a fair price for the solution."
"The tool is open source."
"The tool is open-source."
"This app is completely free and open source. So there is no question about any pricing."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."
"It is open source, and we can scan freely."
"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Fortify WebInspect?
The solution's technical support was very helpful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortify WebInspect?
The price of Fortify WebInspect is high, with the cost depending on the number of virtual users. It is approximately 25% higher than other solutions.
What needs improvement with Fortify WebInspect?
The main area for improvement in Fortify WebInspect is the price, as it is too high compared to the market rate. The cost of the license depends on the number of virtual users and, in comparison to...
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 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...
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.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus WebInspect, WebInspect
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aaron's
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
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
859,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
OSZAR »