APIs · head to head
curl vs OWASP ZAP
curl
APIs
Command-line tool for transferring data using URLs with wide protocol support
- 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: curl open-source with no vendor pricing: curl is free and open-source under GPL 3.0; no subscription or licensing costs apply; 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: curl covers HTTP/HTTPS, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which curl 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 curl
- HTTP/HTTPS
- FTP
- Multiple protocols
- Universal compatibility
- Scripting tools
- Linux support
- MacOS support
- Windows support
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.
curl
- API Developmentnot OWASP ZAP
- API Gatewaynot OWASP ZAP
- API Testingnot OWASP ZAP
- API Documentationnot OWASP ZAP
- Microservicesnot 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 curl
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot curl
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot curl
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot curl
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
curl
- Open-source with no vendor pricing: curl is free and open-source under GPL 3.0; no subscription or licensing costs apply
- Commercial support costs hidden: site references 'commercial support available' but pricing is not detailed or accessible from homepage
- No SaaS model: curl is a command-line tool and library; costs are limited to optional commercial support contracts (pricing unknown)
- Self-support burden: free software means customers rely on community forums or undisclosed commercial support pricing
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
curl
Free- Open SourceFree
- Full curl functionality
- Community support
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose curl if
- You need http/https.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, MacOS, Windows, Unix, Mobile.
- You also want ftp.
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 curl or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. curl 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, curl or OWASP ZAP?
- curl starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does curl or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- curl runs on Linux, MacOS, Windows, Unix, Mobile. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use curl for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is curl best used for?
- curl is most often used for api development, api gateway, api testing, api documentation. Of those, api development and api gateway are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can curl do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- curl covers HTTP/HTTPS, FTP, Multiple protocols, Universal compatibility. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
curl: How much does curl cost?
curl is free and open-source software under the GPL 3.0 license. There is no cost to download, use, or modify the software.
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.
curl: Is commercial support available for curl?
Yes. The curl website references 'commercial support available,' but pricing and details are not disclosed on the homepage and require visiting the support page.
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.
curl: Can I sponsor curl financially?
Yes. The curl website offers an option to 'Sponsor curl financially.' Visitors can donate to support curl development, but the donation link must be accessed through the site's support section.
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
- curl vs Appwrite
- curl vs Hasura
- curl vs PocketBase
- curl vs Sanity
- curl vs HTTPie
- curl vs REST Client VSCode
- curl vs Hoppscotch
- curl vs Bruno
- curl vs Kong Gateway
- curl vs Convoy
- curl vs Directus
- curl vs Moov
- curl vs MX Technologies
- curl vs PubNub
- curl vs Skaleet
- curl vs Svix
- curl vs Synctera
- curl vs Kong
- curl vs 1Password
- curl vs Bitdefender Total Security
- curl vs Norton 360
- curl vs LastPass
- curl vs Bitwarden
- curl vs Burp Suite
- curl vs Metasploit
- curl vs Wireshark
- curl vs authentik
- curl vs Authelia
- curl vs Infisical
- curl vs Trivy
- curl vs Feedzai
- curl vs Frontegg
- curl vs HashiCorp Boundary
- curl vs JumpCloud
- curl vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Appwrite
- OWASP ZAP vs Hasura
- OWASP ZAP vs PocketBase
- OWASP ZAP vs Sanity
- OWASP ZAP vs HTTPie
- OWASP ZAP vs REST Client VSCode
- OWASP ZAP vs Hoppscotch
- OWASP ZAP vs Bruno
- OWASP ZAP vs Kong Gateway
- OWASP ZAP vs Convoy
- OWASP ZAP vs Directus
- OWASP ZAP vs Moov
- OWASP ZAP vs MX Technologies
- OWASP ZAP vs PubNub
- OWASP ZAP vs Skaleet
- OWASP ZAP vs Svix
- OWASP ZAP vs Synctera
- OWASP ZAP vs Kong
- 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