Cybersecurity · head to head
Infisical vs OWASP ZAP
Infisical
Cybersecurity
Security infrastructure for developers and AI agents
- 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: Infisical free tier limited to 5 identities, suitable only for small teams or evaluation; 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: Infisical 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 Infisical 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 Infisical
- Secrets management
- Certificate management
- Privileged access management
- Secret versioning
- Dynamic secrets
- SAML SSO
- Open-source core
- Secrets scanning
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.
Infisical
- Managing secrets across Kubernetes clustersnot OWASP ZAP
- Automating certificate lifecycle for internal PKInot OWASP ZAP
- Providing privileged database access with audit trailsnot OWASP ZAP
- Securing credentials for AI agents at runtimenot 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 Infisical
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Infisical
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Infisical
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Infisical
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Infisical
- Free tier limited to 5 identities, suitable only for small teams or evaluation
- Pricing tiers are per-identity, which scales costs with team size
- Certificate management requires Enterprise plan for advanced features like wildcards
- Privileged access tier is separate billing from secrets management
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
Infisical
Free- FreeFree
- 5 identities
- Unlimited projects
- 3 environments
- Pro - Secrets$20/month
- Per-identity pricing
- Unlimited identities
- SAML SSO
- Pro - Secrets (Annual)$20/year
- Annual discount available
- Unlimited identities
- SAML SSO
- Advanced - Secrets$40/month
- Per-identity pricing
- Dynamic secrets
- Gateways
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose Infisical if
- You need secrets management.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, CLI, Cloud, Self-Hosted.
- You also want certificate management.
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 Infisical or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Infisical 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, Infisical or OWASP ZAP?
- Infisical starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does Infisical or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Infisical runs on Web, CLI, Cloud, Self-Hosted. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use Infisical for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Infisical best used for?
- Infisical is most often used for managing secrets across kubernetes clusters, automating certificate lifecycle for internal pki, providing privileged database access with audit trails, securing credentials for ai agents at runtime. Of those, managing secrets across kubernetes clusters and automating certificate lifecycle for internal pki are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Infisical do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- Infisical covers Secrets management, Certificate management, Privileged access management, Secret versioning. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Infisical: How is pricing calculated for Secrets Management?
Pricing is per-identity per month. Free tier includes 5 identities. Pro tier is $20/identity/month, Advanced is $40/identity/month. All pricing in USD.
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.
Infisical: Can I self-host Infisical?
Yes, Infisical's core is open-source under the MIT license and can be self-hosted. The managed cloud service is also available with additional features.
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.
Infisical: What is included in the Enterprise plan?
Enterprise plan includes SCIM, LDAP, approval workflows, external KMS/HSM support, and 99.99% SLA. Pricing is custom and determined by annual commitment.
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
- Infisical vs Akeyless
- Infisical vs Doppler
- Infisical vs HashiCorp Vault
- Infisical vs Chainguard
- Infisical vs Authelia
- Infisical vs Bitwarden
- Infisical vs Delinea
- Infisical vs Semgrep
- Infisical vs Trivy
- Infisical vs Grype
- Infisical vs Ory Kratos
- Infisical vs Legit Security
- Infisical vs LogRhythm SIEM
- Infisical vs Metasploit
- Infisical vs MetricStream
- Infisical vs Microsoft Defender
- Infisical vs Ory
- Infisical vs Microsoft Sentinel
- Infisical vs 1Password
- Infisical vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Infisical vs Norton 360
- Infisical vs LastPass
- Infisical vs Burp Suite
- Infisical vs Wireshark
- Infisical vs authentik
- Infisical vs Feedzai
- Infisical vs Frontegg
- Infisical vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Infisical vs JumpCloud
- Infisical vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Akeyless
- OWASP ZAP vs Doppler
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Vault
- OWASP ZAP vs Chainguard
- OWASP ZAP vs Authelia
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitwarden
- OWASP ZAP vs Delinea
- OWASP ZAP vs Semgrep
- OWASP ZAP vs Trivy
- OWASP ZAP vs Grype
- OWASP ZAP vs Ory Kratos
- OWASP ZAP vs Legit Security
- OWASP ZAP vs LogRhythm SIEM
- OWASP ZAP vs Metasploit
- OWASP ZAP vs MetricStream
- OWASP ZAP vs Microsoft Defender
- OWASP ZAP vs Ory
- OWASP ZAP vs Microsoft Sentinel
- OWASP ZAP vs 1Password
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Norton 360
- OWASP ZAP vs LastPass
- OWASP ZAP vs Burp Suite
- OWASP ZAP vs Wireshark
- OWASP ZAP vs authentik
- OWASP ZAP vs Feedzai
- OWASP ZAP vs Frontegg
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Boundary
- OWASP ZAP vs JumpCloud
- OWASP ZAP vs McAfee Total Protection