Coverity vs OWASP Zap comparison

Black Duck and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Black Duck is ranked #4 with an average rating of 7.9, while OWASP is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.6. Black Duck holds a 8.4% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 5.1% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

Coverity

Read 41 Coverity reviews

14,372 Views
9,729 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 37 OWASP Zap reviews

15,318 Views
7,373 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Coverity

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

OWASP Zap and Coverity are top contenders in application security testing. Users prefer OWASP Zap for its cost-effectiveness, while Coverity is valued for advanced features despite higher costs.

Features: OWASP Zap offers robust web application security, flexibility, and efficient vulnerability identification. Coverity provides sophisticated static analysis, extensive integration, and strength in large-scale project management.

Room for Improvement: OWASP Zap needs better scalability and integration. Coverity could simplify its setup and configuration. OWASP Zap would benefit from advanced features, whereas Coverity might become more user-friendly.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap has easy deployment and responsive support. Coverity offers detailed deployment but is complex in setup, compensating with effective technical issue resolution.

Pricing and ROI: OWASP Zap is cost-effective with strong ROI for smaller projects. Coverity, although expensive, is seen as a valuable investment for larger security requirements.

To learn more, read our detailed Coverity vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 814,649 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Coverity

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OWASP Zap

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

7th

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.4%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 5.1%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Md. Shahriar Hussain

Cyber Security Chartered Engineer at Banglalink

May 3, 2024

Offers impressive reporting features with user-friendliness and high scalability

The solution can be easily setup but requires heavy integration due to the multiple types of port and programming languages involved. Comparing the resource requirements of the solution I would say it can be installed effortlessly. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. A professional needs some pre-acquired knowledge to manage Coverity's deployment process, but the local solution partners provide support well enough for trouble-free deployment. The overall deployment process of Coverity took around two and a half hours in our organization. The deployment duration depends upon the operating system and resources including high-end RAM and CPU processors.

Read full review

AnkithKumar

Application Security Consultant at Capgemini

Jun 22, 2022

Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security

I use this solution to test applications; web applications, web APIs, and infrastructure. For the web APIs and applications, I use OWASP Zap for interpreting requests and responses, and to see how the application behaves to resist payloads. This is one of the basic applications for us to automate…

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

"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."

"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."

"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."

"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."

"The tool as it is can be used for code quality improvement."

"It is a scalable solution."

"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its interprocedural analysis, which is advantageous because it compares favorably with other tools in terms of security and code analysis."

More Coverity pros

"ZAP is easy to use. The automated scan is a powerful feature. You can simulate attacks with various parameters. ZAP integrates well with SonarQube."

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

"The solution is good at reporting the vulnerabilities of the application."

"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."

"They offer free access to some other tools."

"The stability of the solution is very good."

"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."

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

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."

"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."

"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."

"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."

"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."

"It would be great if we could customize the rules to focus on critical issues."

"Zero-day vulnerability identification can be an add-on feature that Coverity can provide."

"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."

More Coverity cons

"The port scanner is a little too slow."

"Sometimes, we get some false positives."

"Deployment is somewhat complicated."

"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."

"They stopped their support for a short period. They've recently started to come back again. In the early days, support was much better."

"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."

"It doesn't run on absolutely every operating system."

"It needs more robust reporting tools."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a pretty expensive solution. The overall value of the solution could be improved if the price was reduced. Licensing is done on an annual basis."

"The price is competitive with other solutions."

"Coverity is very expensive."

"I would rate Coverity's pricing as a nine out of ten. It's already very expensive, and it's a problem for us to get more licenses due to the price. The pricing model has some good aspects - for example, a personal license gives access to all languages without code limitations, which is better than some competitors. However, it's still a lot of money for us to spend."

"The pricing is on the expensive side, and we are paying for a couple of items."

"I would rate the tool's pricing a one out of ten."

"The pricing is very reasonable compared to other platforms. It is based on a three year license."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is low, and ten is high price."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

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

"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."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"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."

"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."

"OWASP Zap is free to use."

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

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

32%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?

We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...

See all answers

What do you like most about Coverity?

The solution has improved our code quality and security very well.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coverity?

We do it yearly.

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?

The tool is open source.

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Coverity

Compared 54% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Veracode vs Coverity

Compared 5% of the time

More Coverity Competitors

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs OWASP Zap

Compared 22% of the time

Acunetix vs OWASP Zap

Compared 15% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs OWASP Zap

Compared 11% of the time

Veracode vs OWASP Zap

Compared 9% of the time

Checkmarx One vs OWASP Zap

Compared 7% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

November 2024

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

October 2024

Download OWASP Zap product report

Also Known As

Synopsys Static Analysis

No data available

Learn More

Black Duck

OWASP

Overview

Coverity gives you the speed, ease of use, accuracy, industry standards compliance, and scalability that you need to develop high-quality, secure applications. Coverity identifies critical software quality defects and security vulnerabilities in code as it’s written, early in the development process, when it’s least costly and easiest to fix. With the Code Sight integrated development environment (IDE) plugin, developers get accurate analysis in seconds in their IDE as they code. Precise actionable remediation advice and context-specific eLearning help your developers understand how to fix their prioritized issues quickly, without having to become security experts.

Coverity seamlessly integrates automated security testing into your CI/CD pipelines and supports your existing development tools and workflows. Choose where and how to do your development: on-premises or in the cloud with the Polaris Software Integrity Platform (SaaS), a highly scalable, cloud-based application security platform. Coverity supports more than 20 languages and 200 frameworks and templates.

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.

Sample Customers

SAP, Mega International, Thales Alenia Space

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

Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

October 2024

Free Report: Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Coverity 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.