GitHub Code Scanning vs OWASP Zap comparison

GitHub and OWASP are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. GitHub is ranked #21 with an average rating of 9.5, while OWASP is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.6. GitHub holds a 0.7% mindshare in SAST, compared to OWASP’s 5.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of GitHub users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of OWASP users who would recommend it.

GitHub Code Scanning

Read 2 GitHub Code Scanning reviews

510 Views
449 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OWASP Zap

Read 38 OWASP Zap reviews

13,584 Views
6,879 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

GitHub Code Scanning

OWASP Zap

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

OWASP Zap and GitHub Code Scanning offer unique strengths in vulnerability management. GitHub Code Scanning appears to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive features and integration capabilities, while OWASP Zap is advantageous in pricing and support.

Features: OWASP Zap includes a wide range of security testing options, excellent customer support integration, and effective threat management tools. GitHub Code Scanning provides advanced automated scanning, seamless integration with DevOps tools, and superior code analysis.

Room for Improvement: OWASP Zap needs better reporting functionalities, improved integration with diverse DevOps tools, and enhanced performance for complex tasks. GitHub Code Scanning should enhance handling of large codebases, offer better customization of security rules, and improve user interface intuitiveness.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OWASP Zap is recognized for straightforward installation and responsive customer service, making it a preferred choice for easy deployment. GitHub Code Scanning presents a steeper learning curve but compensates with consistent updates and quality service support.

Pricing and ROI: OWASP Zap is more cost-effective, ideal for budget-conscious organizations, providing quick ROI. While GitHub Code Scanning involves higher costs, the investment is justified by superior features and seamless integration that offer strong returns.

To learn more, read our detailed GitHub Code Scanning vs. OWASP Zap Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

GitHub Code Scanning vs. OWASP Zap

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,071 peers since 2012

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

GitHub Code Scanning

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

21st

Average Rating

9.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.4

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 January 2025, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of GitHub Code Scanning is 0.7%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OWASP Zap is 5.2%, down from 6.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

VishalSingh

Consulting & Solutions, BA/BD in Enterprise IT on Open Source, Red Hat & EDB at KEEN AND ABLE COMPUTERS PVT LTD

Traverses the entire network, scanning every system to determine which ports are open

You can use the tool locally on your system or in the cloud. I rate it a nine out of ten. It's a very good tool for people who want to start using GitHubCode Scanning, especially for software development or team collaboration. GitHubCode Scanning allows teams to collaborate by uploading files to repositories. For example, if someone is developing an application, they can host the code on GitHub Code Scanning. Other developers can then download the code for testing purposes. If bugs are found, fixes can be applied using the GitHub Code Scanningrepository, and everyone on the team can see the changes. Software developers often use GitHub Code Scanning for version control, and it's essential for CI/CD pipelines to work.

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

"The solution helps identify vulnerabilities by understanding how ports communicate with applications running on a system. Ports are like house numbers; to visit someone's house, you must know their number. Similarly, ports are used to communicate with applications. For example, if you want to use an HTTP web server, you must use port 80. It is the port on which the web application or your server listens for incoming requests."

"We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management."

"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."

"It can be used effectively for internal auditing."

"The solution is scalable."

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

"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."

"It scans while you navigate, then you can save the requests performed and work with them later."

"We use the solution for security testing."

More OWASP Zap pros

Cons

"GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates."

"Lacks resources where users can internally access a learning module from the tool."

"It would be beneficial to enhance the algorithm to provide better summaries of automatic scanning results."

"For scalability, I would rate OWASP Zap between four to five out of ten."

"There are too many false positives."

"There's very little documentation that comes with OWASP Zap."

"The automated vulnerability assessments that the application performs needs to be simplified as well as diversified."

"The solution is unable to customize reports."

"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."

More OWASP Zap cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month."

"GitHub Code Scanning is a moderately priced solution."

"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."

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

"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."

"The solution’s pricing is high."

"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."

"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."

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

831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Government

Financial Services Firm

Transportation Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitHub Code Scanning?

We use GitHub Code Scanning mostly for source code management.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub Code Scanning?

The minimum pricing for the tool is five dollars a month.

See all answers

What needs improvement with GitHub Code Scanning?

GitHub Code Scanning should add more templates.

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 GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 31% of the time

Coverity vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 26% of the time

SonarQube Cloud (formerly SonarCloud) vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 22% of the time

Polaris Software Integrity Platform vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs GitHub Code Scanning

Compared 4% of the time

More GitHub Code Scanning 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 10% 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

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

December 2024

Download GitHub Code Scanning product report

Buyer's Guide

OWASP Zap

January 2025

Download OWASP Zap product report

Learn More

GitHub

OWASP

Overview

Code scanning is a feature that you use to analyze the code in a GitHub repository to find security vulnerabilities and coding errors. Any problems identified by the analysis are shown in GitHub.

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

Information Not Available

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

GitHub Code Scanning vs. OWASP Zap

January 2025

Free Report: GitHub Code Scanning vs. OWASP Zap

Find out what your peers are saying about GitHub Code Scanning vs. OWASP Zap and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our GitHub Code Scanning 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.