Cybersecurity · head to head
Ory Kratos vs OWASP ZAP
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: Ory Kratos headless means you build every screen, which is significant work compared with a hosted login page; 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: Ory Kratos covers Headless API, OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Ory Kratos and OWASP ZAP actually diverge.
| Attribute | Ory Kratos | OWASP ZAP |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | Open-source self-hosted, with a paid managed network | free |
| Platforms | Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted | Desktop, Cli, Api |
| Founded | Unknown | 2001 |
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 Ory Kratos
- Headless API
- Self-service flows
- Multi-factor authentication
- Pluggable identity schemas
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.
Ory Kratos
- Products needing complete control over the look and flow of authenticationnot OWASP ZAP
- Applications that must not hand user identity data to a third partynot OWASP ZAP
- Teams building identity as infrastructure across several servicesnot 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 Ory Kratos
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Ory Kratos
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Ory Kratos
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Ory Kratos
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Ory Kratos
- Headless means you build every screen, which is significant work compared with a hosted login page
- More moving parts than a monolithic IAM: Kratos handles identity, and OAuth2 needs Ory Hydra alongside
- Documentation assumes real familiarity with identity concepts and is not a gentle introduction
- Self-hosting identity carries the security and availability burden that hosted providers absorb
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
Ory Kratos
Free- Self-hostedFree
- Full identity server
- All flows
- Community support
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Which should you pick?
Choose Ory Kratos if
- You need headless api.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
- You also want self-service flows.
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 Ory Kratos or OWASP ZAP better?
- Neither clearly leads. Ory Kratos 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, Ory Kratos or OWASP ZAP?
- Ory Kratos starts at Free and OWASP ZAP at Free.
- Does Ory Kratos or OWASP ZAP run on more platforms?
- Ory Kratos runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted. OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api.
- Can I use Ory Kratos for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Ory Kratos best used for?
- Ory Kratos is most often used for products needing complete control over the look and flow of authentication, applications that must not hand user identity data to a third party, teams building identity as infrastructure across several services. Of those, products needing complete control over the look and flow of authentication and applications that must not hand user identity data to a third party are not what OWASP ZAP is typically brought in for.
- What can Ory Kratos do that OWASP ZAP cannot?
- Ory Kratos covers Headless API, Self-service flows, Multi-factor authentication, Pluggable identity schemas. OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Ory Kratos: Is Ory Kratos free?
Yes, open source and free to self-host. Ory Network is a paid managed service.
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.
Ory Kratos: What does headless mean here?
Kratos provides identity flows as APIs and no user interface. You build the login, registration and recovery screens yourself.
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.
Ory Kratos: Does Kratos do OAuth2?
No. Kratos handles user identity; OAuth2 and OpenID Connect provider functionality is Ory Hydra, a separate component.
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
- Ory Kratos vs Logto
- Ory Kratos vs Authelia
- Ory Kratos vs 1Password
- Ory Kratos vs authentik
- Ory Kratos vs Clerk
- Ory Kratos vs Trivy
- Ory Kratos vs LastPass
- Ory Kratos vs HashiCorp Vault
- Ory Kratos vs Bitwarden
- Ory Kratos vs Frontegg
- Ory Kratos vs Infisical
- Ory Kratos vs Semgrep
- Ory Kratos vs Envysion
- Ory Kratos vs Feedzai
- Ory Kratos vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Ory Kratos vs JumpCloud
- Ory Kratos vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Ory Kratos vs Norton 360
- Ory Kratos vs Burp Suite
- Ory Kratos vs Metasploit
- Ory Kratos vs Wireshark
- Ory Kratos vs McAfee Total Protection
- OWASP ZAP vs Logto
- OWASP ZAP vs Authelia
- OWASP ZAP vs 1Password
- OWASP ZAP vs authentik
- OWASP ZAP vs Clerk
- OWASP ZAP vs Trivy
- OWASP ZAP vs LastPass
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Vault
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitwarden
- OWASP ZAP vs Frontegg
- OWASP ZAP vs Infisical
- OWASP ZAP vs Semgrep
- OWASP ZAP vs Envysion
- OWASP ZAP vs Feedzai
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Boundary
- OWASP ZAP vs JumpCloud
- OWASP ZAP vs Bitdefender Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Norton 360
- OWASP ZAP vs Burp Suite
- OWASP ZAP vs Metasploit
- OWASP ZAP vs Wireshark
- OWASP ZAP vs McAfee Total Protection