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 8.0, while OWASP is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.6. Black Duck holds a 8.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 5.2% 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 42 Coverity reviews

13,639 Views
9,320 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 38 OWASP Zap reviews

14,380 Views
7,111 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: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,053 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Coverity

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

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

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Coverity is 8.5%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 5.2%, 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

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

Amit Beniwal

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.

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

"Coverity integrates with issue-tracking systems like Jira and provides email notifications, alerts, and other features."

"Coverity is easy to use and easy to integrate with CI."

"Coverity is scalable."

"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."

"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."

"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."

"The reporting feature is up to the mark."

"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."

More Coverity pros

"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."

"The interface is easy to use."

"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."

"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."

"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. I think it's stable enough. I don't see any crashes within the application, so its stability is high."

"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."

"The HUD is a good feature that provides on-site testing and saves a lot of time."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."

"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."

"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."

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

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

"The quality of the code needs improvement."

"Coverity concerns its dashboards and reporting."

"I had tried integrating the tool with Azure DevOps, but the report I got stated that my team faced many challenges."

More Coverity cons

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

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

"Too many false positives; test reports could be improved."

"The port scanner is a little too slow."

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

"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."

"Deployment is somewhat complicated."

"The documentation is lacking and out-of-date, it really needs more love."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate Coverity's price a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."

"The licensing fees are based on the number of lines of code."

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

"The solution's pricing is comparable to other products."

"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."

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

"The tool was fairly priced."

"The price is competitive with other solutions."

More Coverity pricing and cost advice

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

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

"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."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"This solution is open source and free."

"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 tool is open-source."

"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

824,053 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

12%

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?

I do not know about the pricing.

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 53% of the time

Klocwork vs Coverity

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify on Demand vs Coverity

Compared 6% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Coverity

Compared 5% 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 14% 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 8% of the time

More OWASP Zap Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Coverity

December 2024

Download Coverity product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

December 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

December 2024

Free Report: Coverity vs. OWASP Zap

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,053 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.