Developer Tools · head to head
Backstage vs OWASP ZAP
Backstage
Developer Tools
Open source internal developer portal framework created and open sourced by Spotify
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
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: Backstage backstage is a framework rather than a product: there is no supported turnkey install, so getting to a usable portal means a TypeScript and React project your team owns, hosts and upgrades forever.; 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: Backstage covers Software catalogue, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Backstage and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).
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 Backstage
- Software catalogue
- Software templates
- TechDocs
- Plugin architecture
- Kubernetes plugin
- Search
- Entity ownership model
- Auth provider integrations
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.
Backstage
- An engineering organisation past roughly a hundred services where nobody can reliably answer who owns a given service at two in the morningnot OWASP ZAP
- A platform team enforcing golden paths, so a new service is scaffolded with logging, CI and security defaults already wired innot OWASP ZAP
- A company consolidating scattered READMEs and Confluence pages into docs that live beside the code and cannot silently rot unnoticednot OWASP ZAP
- A regulated business that needs an auditable register of every running service, its owner and its data classificationnot 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 Backstage
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Backstage
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Backstage
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Backstage
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Backstage
- Backstage is a framework rather than a product: there is no supported turnkey install, so getting to a usable portal means a TypeScript and React project your team owns, hosts and upgrades forever.
- Upstream releases move quickly and plugin APIs have broken across major versions, so a customised deployment accumulates upgrade debt and teams routinely fall months behind on versions they cannot cheaply catch up on.
- The catalogue is only as good as the YAML descriptors engineers remember to write; without enforcement the register drifts out of date, and a developer portal nobody trusts is abandoned faster than one that never existed.
- Community plugin quality varies sharply, with many unmaintained or pinned to old core versions, so the plugin that made the business case may be the one blocking your next upgrade.
- Spotify Portal, the packaged commercial route, publishes no price at all and is quoted as a custom annual subscription, so the only cost you can actually forecast up front is the self-hosted one, which is the option with the largest hidden staffing bill.
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
Backstage
Free- Backstage (open source)Free
- Apache 2.0 licence
- Software catalogue, templates, TechDocs and search
- Full plugin ecosystem
- Spotify Portal for Backstage$undefined/year
- Packaged commercial distribution from Spotify
- Spotify premium plugins including Soundcheck and Insights
- Simplified setup and managed upgrade path
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose Backstage if
- You need software catalogue.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, Self-hosted, Linux, Docker, Kubernetes.
- You also want software templates.
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 Backstage or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Backstage 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, Backstage or OWASP ZAP?
- Backstage starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does Backstage or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Backstage runs on Web, Self-hosted, Linux, Docker, Kubernetes. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use Backstage for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Backstage best used for?
- Backstage is most often used for an engineering organisation past roughly a hundred services where nobody can reliably answer who owns a given service at two in the morning, a platform team enforcing golden paths, so a new service is scaffolded with logging, ci and security defaults already wired in, a company consolidating scattered readmes and confluence pages into docs that live beside the code and cannot silently rot unnoticed, a regulated business that needs an auditable register of every running service, its owner and its data classification. Of those, an engineering organisation past roughly a hundred services where nobody can reliably answer who owns a given service at two in the morning and a platform team enforcing golden paths, so a new service is scaffolded with logging, ci and security defaults already wired in are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Backstage do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- Backstage covers Software catalogue, Software templates, TechDocs, Plugin architecture. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Backstage: Is Backstage free?
The project is Apache 2.0 with no licence fee. The real cost is engineering time; teams commonly dedicate one to two engineers permanently to running it.
OWASP 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.
Backstage: Do I need to write code to use it?
Yes. Configuring and extending a Backstage application is a TypeScript and React project. This is the single most common misjudgement buyers make.
OWASP 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.
Backstage: What is Spotify Portal for Backstage?
A commercial distribution from Spotify with premium plugins and support, generally available since October 2025 and sold as a quoted annual subscription with no published price.
OWASP 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.
Backstage: Who owns the project?
Spotify created and open sourced it; it is now a CNCF project, so the upstream roadmap is not solely Spotify controlled.
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
- Backstage vs Harness
- Backstage vs Cortex
- Backstage vs OpsLevel
- Backstage vs Tilt
- Backstage vs Ansible
- Backstage vs Frappe
- Backstage vs Refact
- Backstage vs Soketi
- Backstage vs Visual Studio Code
- Backstage vs Penpot
- Backstage vs GNU Emacs
- Backstage vs Bazel
- Backstage vs Argo CD
- Backstage vs Atlantis
- Backstage vs Blacksmith
- Backstage vs Coder
- Backstage vs Garden
- Backstage vs GitLab CI/CD
- Backstage vs 1Password
- Backstage vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Backstage vs Norton 360
- Backstage vs LastPass
- Backstage vs Bitwarden
- Backstage vs Burp Suite
- Backstage vs Metasploit
- Backstage vs Wireshark
- Backstage vs authentik
- Backstage vs Authelia
- Backstage vs Infisical
- Backstage vs Trivy
- Backstage vs Feedzai
- Backstage vs Frontegg
- Backstage vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Backstage vs JumpCloud
- Backstage vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Harness
- OWASP ZAP vs Cortex
- OWASP ZAP vs OpsLevel
- OWASP ZAP vs Tilt
- OWASP ZAP vs Ansible
- OWASP ZAP vs Frappe
- OWASP ZAP vs Refact
- OWASP ZAP vs Soketi
- OWASP ZAP vs Visual Studio Code
- OWASP ZAP vs Penpot
- OWASP ZAP vs GNU Emacs
- OWASP ZAP vs Bazel
- OWASP ZAP vs Argo CD
- OWASP ZAP vs Atlantis
- OWASP ZAP vs Blacksmith
- OWASP ZAP vs Coder
- OWASP ZAP vs Garden
- OWASP ZAP vs GitLab CI/CD
- 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 Infisical
- OWASP ZAP vs Trivy
- OWASP ZAP vs Feedzai
- OWASP ZAP vs Frontegg
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Boundary
- OWASP ZAP vs JumpCloud
- OWASP ZAP vs McAfee Total Protection