Cybersecurity · head to head
Akeyless vs OWASP ZAP
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Akeyless pricing is usage-based and complex, requires sales consultation; OWASP ZAP authenticated scanning of modern single-page applications is the hard part and ZAP makes you build it by hand: session handling, token refresh and login scripts are configured per application, and a misconfigured session means the scanner logs itself out and reports a clean result for pages it never reached.
- They diverge on capability: Akeyless covers Secrets management, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Akeyless and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Akeyless
- Secrets management
- Machine identity
- AI agent identity
- Certificate management
- Privileged access management
- Multi-vault governance
- Encryption and KMS
- Password manager
Only in OWASP ZAP
- Intercepting proxy
- Passive scanner
- Active scanner
- AJAX spider
- Automation Framework
- Headless daemon and REST API
- Docker images
- Add-on marketplace
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Akeyless
- Securing AI agents with dedicated identity trackingnot OWASP ZAP
- Managing machine-to-machine credentials at scalenot OWASP ZAP
- Automating PKI and certificate lifecyclenot OWASP ZAP
- Implementing just-in-time privileged accessnot OWASP ZAP
OWASP ZAP
- Adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handfulnot Akeyless
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Akeyless
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Akeyless
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Akeyless
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Akeyless
- Pricing is usage-based and complex, requires sales consultation
- Free tier is very limited with restricted access
- No transparent pricing published for enterprise features
- Pricing model varies significantly by product module
OWASP ZAP
- Authenticated scanning of modern single-page applications is the hard part and ZAP makes you build it by hand: session handling, token refresh and login scripts are configured per application, and a misconfigured session means the scanner logs itself out and reports a clean result for pages it never reached.
- There is no support contract in the product, so when a scan breaks the day before a release the escalation path is a GitHub issue and a community chat, which is not an answer that satisfies a delivery manager or an auditor who wants a named responsible party.
- Active scanning sends genuine attack traffic, so it can create records, trigger emails, exhaust rate limits or destabilise a fragile environment, and pointing it at production without prior agreement produces an incident rather than a test result.
- Output needs triage: passive rules generate large volumes of low-severity informational findings about headers and cookie flags that bury the few results that matter, and a team without someone tuning the rule set stops reading the report within a few sprints.
- As a dynamic scanner it can only test what it can reach, so authorisation flaws between accounts, business logic abuse and anything behind an undiscovered endpoint go unreported, and a passing ZAP scan is evidence of nothing more than the absence of the classes of bug it looks for.
Pricing, plan by plan
Akeyless
Free- FreeFree
- Limited feature access
- Restricted usage quotas
- Enterprise$undefined/custom
- Custom pricing based on usage
- Unlimited resource quotas
- Full feature access
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose Akeyless if
- You need secrets management.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Cloud, Hybrid, On-Premises.
- You also want machine identity.
Choose OWASP ZAP if
- You need intercepting proxy.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- You also want passive scanner.
Questions people ask
- Is Akeyless or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Akeyless starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Akeyless or OWASP ZAP?
- Akeyless starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does Akeyless or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Akeyless runs on Cloud, Hybrid, On-Premises. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use Akeyless for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Akeyless best used for?
- Akeyless is most often used for securing ai agents with dedicated identity tracking, managing machine-to-machine credentials at scale, automating pki and certificate lifecycle, implementing just-in-time privileged access. Of those, securing ai agents with dedicated identity tracking and managing machine-to-machine credentials at scale are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Akeyless do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- Akeyless covers Secrets management, Machine identity, AI agent identity, Certificate management. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Akeyless: What pricing model does Akeyless use?
Akeyless uses usage-based pricing units that vary by product. For example, Secrets Management is priced by clients, Certificate Management by managed certificates, Encryption by transactions, and PAM by users. Contact sales for a custom quote.
SourceOWASP ZAP: Is it still called OWASP ZAP?
The project left OWASP in August 2024 and is now governed by the Software Security Project, with core development sponsored by Checkmarx. The tool is now just ZAP, though most existing documentation, courses and search results still use the OWASP name.
Akeyless: Does Akeyless support hybrid deployment?
Yes, Akeyless offers Pure SaaS cloud-managed deployment and Hybrid SaaS with on-premise gateways and zero-knowledge encryption for sensitive environments.
SourceOWASP ZAP: Is it free for commercial use?
Yes. It is Apache 2.0 licensed, with no per-application, per-scan or per-user cost, and it can be used and modified commercially without a licence agreement.
Akeyless: How does Akeyless handle AI agent identities?
Akeyless provides dedicated AI agent identity tracking with runtime access control, allowing organizations to manage AI agent access separately from human and machine identities.
SourceOWASP ZAP: Can it replace a penetration test?
No. It automates checks for known vulnerability classes against endpoints it can reach. It does not reason about business logic, chain findings into an attack, or test authorisation between accounts, which is most of what a tester actually does.
OWASP ZAP: Does it run in CI?
Yes, through the official Docker images and the Automation Framework, which defines scan jobs in YAML so configuration lives in the repository. A baseline passive scan is the usual starting point because it is fast and non-intrusive.
OWASP ZAP: How does it compare to Burp Suite?
Burp Suite Professional is the more polished manual testing tool and has a stronger scanner and extension ecosystem, but it is licensed per tester and Burp Suite Enterprise per target. ZAP is the better fit where cost per target is the binding constraint; many teams use both.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Akeyless vs Infisical
- Akeyless vs Doppler
- Akeyless vs HashiCorp Vault
- Akeyless vs Frontegg
- Akeyless vs Endor Labs
- Akeyless vs Aikido
- Akeyless vs Speakeasy
- Akeyless vs Keeper Password Manager
- Akeyless vs Delinea
- Akeyless vs Chainguard
- Akeyless vs Tenable
- Akeyless vs Sticky Password
- Akeyless vs Grype
- Akeyless vs Hanwha Vision
- Akeyless vs Idira
- Akeyless vs IVPN
- Akeyless vs Logto
- Akeyless vs Malwarebytes
- Akeyless vs 1Password
- Akeyless vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Akeyless vs Norton 360
- Akeyless vs LastPass
- Akeyless vs Bitwarden
- Akeyless vs Burp Suite
- Akeyless vs Metasploit
- Akeyless vs Wireshark
- Akeyless vs authentik
- Akeyless vs Authelia
- Akeyless vs Trivy
- Akeyless vs Feedzai
- Akeyless vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Akeyless vs JumpCloud
- Akeyless vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Infisical
- OWASP ZAP vs Doppler
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Vault
- OWASP ZAP vs Frontegg
- OWASP ZAP vs Endor Labs
- OWASP ZAP vs Aikido
- OWASP ZAP vs Speakeasy
- OWASP ZAP vs Keeper Password Manager
- OWASP ZAP vs Delinea
- OWASP ZAP vs Chainguard
- OWASP ZAP vs Tenable
- OWASP ZAP vs Sticky Password
- OWASP ZAP vs Grype
- OWASP ZAP vs Hanwha Vision
- OWASP ZAP vs Idira
- OWASP ZAP vs IVPN
- OWASP ZAP vs Logto
- OWASP ZAP vs Malwarebytes
- OWASP ZAP vs 1Password
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Norton 360
- OWASP ZAP vs LastPass
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitwarden
- OWASP ZAP vs Burp Suite
- OWASP ZAP vs Metasploit
- OWASP ZAP vs Wireshark
- OWASP ZAP vs authentik
- OWASP ZAP vs Authelia
- OWASP ZAP vs Trivy
- OWASP ZAP vs Feedzai
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Boundary
- OWASP ZAP vs JumpCloud
- OWASP ZAP vs McAfee Total Protection