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

OWASP Zap vs Rapid7 InsightAppSec 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

OWASP Zap
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (11th)
Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. OWASP Zap is designed for Static Application Security Testing (SAST) and holds a mindshare of 5.1%, down 5.8% compared to last year.
Rapid7 InsightAppSec, on the other hand, focuses on Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST), holds 12.2% mindshare, down 13.7% since last year.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Krzysztof Witko - PeerSpot reviewer
Automated authorization streamlines security processes
The previous product, AppSpyder, had a virtual patching module where we could generate patches for third-party web application firewalls, such as Imperva or F5. Currently, InsightAppSec lacks similar functionality. Customers must wait for remediation during the developers' preparation of a new version. Virtual patching could help protect web pages shortly after finishing the scan process.

Quotes from Members

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

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."
"One valuable feature of OWASP Zap is that it is simple to use."
"It's great that we can use it with Portswigger Burp."
"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."
"OWASP is quite matured in identifying the vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature is scanning the URL to drill down all the different sites."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The vulnerabilities that it finds, because the primary goal is to secure applications and websites."
"We have seen measurable decrease in the mean time to respond to threats by 20 percent."
"The product’s most valuable feature is UI. It is easy to manage and find vulnerabilities in the application."
"I rate stability ten out of ten."
"I would rate the technical support from Rapid7 a ten, indicating high-quality support."
"The automatic automation of the automated authorization to the SCANNET environment is valuable."
"The templates feature is very easy. You just choose the kind of attack you want on your web application, and you run it against that template and receive a report. It's great."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the graphical interface."
"Dynamic application security scanning provides predefined templates and supports customization. The ability to scan external and internal applications, including on-premises ones, is precious. Additionally, it is a cloud platform, so we don't need to deploy servers or resources. This makes it time-efficient and cost-effective."
 

Cons

"ZAP's integration with cloud-based CICD pipelines could be better. The scan should run through the entire pipeline."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"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 are areas for improvement with OWASP Zap, particularly in the alignment of vulnerabilities concerning CVSS scores."
"It would be nice to have a solid SQL injection engine built into Zap."
"It doesn't run on absolutely every operating system."
"As security evolves, we would like DevOps built into it. As of now, Zap does not provide this."
"It would be a great improvement if they could include a marketplace to add extra features to the tool."
"They should add more features. I would like to see them do a little more on static analysis and also interactivity analysis. Currently, it does very basic static analysis. It could do a little more static analysis, which is something that would help. A lot more interactivity analysis should also be there. It should basically look at security during interactivity."
"I would like more details of what the product can do."
"The number of web applications we can scan is limited."
"We get a lot of false positives during the tests."
"Currently, InsightAppSec lacks similar functionality. Customers must wait for remediation during the developers' preparation of a new version."
"The product’s pricing could be flexible."
"There is room for improvement in Rapid7 InsightAppSec by giving clients the ability for extra columns on reports and enabling the extraction of remediation reports into a CSV format. Currently, the PDF format is cumbersome to go through when dealing with thousands of pages."
"The interface should be a little bit easier to manage. Sometimes, the logic that they use is kind of strange. They need to work a little bit more on their interface to make it more understandable. The interface is the only problem. I'm using Rapid7, which is very intuitive. There are other applications available in the market with a better interface. They can include more techniques or options to test different types of security because the templates are limited. It would be great to see them follow the MITRE ATT&CK framework or what is there in tools like Veracode and Synopsys."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is highly recommended as it is an open source tool."
"OWASP ZAP is a free tool provided by OWASP’s engineers and experts. There is an option to donate."
"OWASP Zap is free to use."
"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."
"We have used the freeware version. I believe Zap only has freeware."
"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."
"As Zap is free and open-source, with tons of features similar to those of commercial solutions, I would definitely recommend trying it out."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
"They offer a good price, but I don't remember its cost. It is fair as compared to the competition. We have opted for project-based licensing, not user-based. We can add any number of users. That doesn't matter. It is worth the money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What do you like most about Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
In Rapid7 InsightAppSec, a distinctive feature is the provision of a CDM for integrating web servers and web applications. To establish the connection between these applications, you only need to p...
What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
There is room for improvement in Rapid7 InsightAppSec by giving clients the ability for extra columns on reports and enabling the extraction of remediation reports into a CSV format. Currently, the...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
Our primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec ( /products/rapid7-insightappsec-reviews ) is to scan for vulnerabilities on our APIs and UIs. We provide this service while being based at a client lo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
InsightAppSec
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
CenterPoint Energy, CPA Australia, Hypertherm, First American Financial Corporation, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about OWASP Zap vs. Rapid7 InsightAppSec and other solutions. Updated: May 2022.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.