Cloud · head to head
Cilium vs OWASP ZAP
Cilium
Cloud
eBPF-based networking, observability and security for Kubernetes
- 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: Cilium requires a recent Linux kernel, which rules out older distributions and some managed environments; 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: Cilium covers eBPF datapath, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Cilium 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 Cilium
- eBPF datapath
- Identity-based policy
- Hubble observability
- Sidecar-free mesh
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.
Cilium
- Kubernetes networking at a scale where iptables-based CNI performance degradesnot OWASP ZAP
- Network policy expressed on workload identity rather than fragile IP rulesnot OWASP ZAP
- Seeing which services actually talk to each other, and what policy is droppingnot 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 Cilium
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Cilium
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Cilium
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Cilium
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Cilium
- Requires a recent Linux kernel, which rules out older distributions and some managed environments
- eBPF is genuinely hard to debug when it misbehaves, and the skill is rare on most teams
- Broad scope — CNI, policy, mesh, observability — means the learning curve covers several domains at once
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
Cilium
Free- CiliumFree
- Full functionality
- No usage limits
- Community support
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose Cilium if
- You need ebpf datapath.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Kubernetes, Linux.
- You also want identity-based policy.
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 Cilium or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Cilium 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, Cilium or OWASP ZAP?
- Cilium starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does Cilium or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Cilium runs on Kubernetes, Linux. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use Cilium for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Cilium best used for?
- Cilium is most often used for kubernetes networking at a scale where iptables-based cni performance degrades, network policy expressed on workload identity rather than fragile ip rules, seeing which services actually talk to each other, and what policy is dropping. Of those, kubernetes networking at a scale where iptables-based cni performance degrades and network policy expressed on workload identity rather than fragile ip rules are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Cilium do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- Cilium covers eBPF datapath, Identity-based policy, Hubble observability, Sidecar-free mesh. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Cilium: Is Cilium free?
Yes, open source and CNCF-graduated. Isovalent sells an enterprise distribution and support.
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.
Cilium: What does eBPF change?
It lets Cilium run packet-processing programs inside the kernel instead of relying on iptables rule chains, which behave poorly as the number of services grows.
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.
Cilium: Does Cilium replace a service mesh?
It can cover much of what a mesh does without sidecars, though full mesh feature sets still favour Istio or Linkerd.
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.
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
- Cilium vs Podman
- Cilium vs K3s
- Cilium vs Akamai
- Cilium vs Crossplane
- Cilium vs OpenEBS
- Cilium vs DigitalOcean
- Cilium vs Portworx
- Cilium vs Vault
- Cilium vs Fastly
- Cilium vs HAProxy
- Cilium vs Hetzner Cloud
- Cilium vs Infracost
- Cilium vs Lambda
- Cilium vs Linode
- Cilium vs Northflank
- Cilium vs Oracle Cloud
- Cilium vs Buildah
- Cilium vs Rancher
- Cilium vs 1Password
- Cilium vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Cilium vs Norton 360
- Cilium vs LastPass
- Cilium vs Bitwarden
- Cilium vs Burp Suite
- Cilium vs Metasploit
- Cilium vs Wireshark
- Cilium vs authentik
- Cilium vs Authelia
- Cilium vs Infisical
- Cilium vs Trivy
- Cilium vs Feedzai
- Cilium vs Frontegg
- Cilium vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Cilium vs JumpCloud
- Cilium vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Podman
- OWASP ZAP vs K3s
- OWASP ZAP vs Akamai
- OWASP ZAP vs Crossplane
- OWASP ZAP vs OpenEBS
- OWASP ZAP vs DigitalOcean
- OWASP ZAP vs Portworx
- OWASP ZAP vs Vault
- OWASP ZAP vs Fastly
- OWASP ZAP vs HAProxy
- OWASP ZAP vs Hetzner Cloud
- OWASP ZAP vs Infracost
- OWASP ZAP vs Lambda
- OWASP ZAP vs Linode
- OWASP ZAP vs Northflank
- OWASP ZAP vs Oracle Cloud
- OWASP ZAP vs Buildah
- OWASP ZAP vs Rancher
- 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