Government · head to head
MuckRock vs OWASP ZAP

OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
The short version
- Each has a real cost: MuckRock muckRock's core platform, Squarelet identity service, and DocumentCloud are licensed AGPL-3.0, which requires anyone running a modified version as a network service to release their source code; 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: MuckRock covers FOIA Filing, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which MuckRock 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 MuckRock
- FOIA Filing
- Request Tracking
- Document Archive
- Collaboration
- Agency Directory
- DocumentCloud
- News Organizations
- Research Tools
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.
MuckRock
- Citizen Servicesnot OWASP ZAP
- Records Managementnot OWASP ZAP
- Public Safetynot OWASP ZAP
- Civic Engagementnot 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 MuckRock
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot MuckRock
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot MuckRock
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot MuckRock
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
MuckRock
- MuckRock's core platform, Squarelet identity service, and DocumentCloud are licensed AGPL-3.0, which requires anyone running a modified version as a network service to release their source code
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
MuckRock
Free- BasicFree
- FOIA Filing
- Request Tracking
- Document Archive
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose MuckRock if
- You need foia filing.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want request tracking.
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 MuckRock or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. MuckRock 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, MuckRock or OWASP ZAP?
- MuckRock starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does MuckRock or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- MuckRock runs on Web. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use MuckRock for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is MuckRock best used for?
- MuckRock is most often used for citizen services, records management, public safety, civic engagement. Of those, citizen services and records management are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can MuckRock do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- MuckRock covers FOIA Filing, Request Tracking, Document Archive, Collaboration. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
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.
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.
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
- MuckRock vs Accela
- MuckRock vs CivicPlus
- MuckRock vs Granicus
- MuckRock vs DocuWare
- MuckRock vs NextRequest
- MuckRock vs OpenGov
- MuckRock vs Socrata
- MuckRock vs ClearGov
- MuckRock vs iCompass
- MuckRock vs Laserfiche
- MuckRock vs NEXGEN Asset Management
- MuckRock vs Trimble Unity Maintain
- MuckRock vs VUEWorks
- MuckRock vs American Legal Publishing
- MuckRock vs ArchiveSocial
- MuckRock vs GovQA
- MuckRock vs Legistar
- MuckRock vs 1Password
- MuckRock vs Bitdefender Total Security
- MuckRock vs Norton 360
- MuckRock vs LastPass
- MuckRock vs Bitwarden
- MuckRock vs Burp Suite
- MuckRock vs Metasploit
- MuckRock vs Wireshark
- MuckRock vs authentik
- MuckRock vs Authelia
- MuckRock vs Infisical
- MuckRock vs Trivy
- MuckRock vs Feedzai
- MuckRock vs Frontegg
- MuckRock vs HashiCorp Boundary
- MuckRock vs JumpCloud
- MuckRock vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Accela
- OWASP ZAP vs CivicPlus
- OWASP ZAP vs Granicus
- OWASP ZAP vs DocuWare
- OWASP ZAP vs NextRequest
- OWASP ZAP vs OpenGov
- OWASP ZAP vs Socrata
- OWASP ZAP vs ClearGov
- OWASP ZAP vs iCompass
- OWASP ZAP vs Laserfiche
- OWASP ZAP vs NEXGEN Asset Management
- OWASP ZAP vs Trimble Unity Maintain
- OWASP ZAP vs VUEWorks
- OWASP ZAP vs American Legal Publishing
- OWASP ZAP vs ArchiveSocial
- OWASP ZAP vs GovQA
- OWASP ZAP vs Legistar
- 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

