Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

OWASP ZAP vs Refact

OWASP ZAP logo

OWASP ZAP

Cybersecurity

Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Refact logo

Refact

Developer Tools

Autonomous AI coding agent for development tasks

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: 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.; Refact requires configuration for optimal performance
  • They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Refact covers Autonomous agent workflows.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Refact actually diverge.

Attributes where OWASP ZAP and Refact differ
AttributeOWASP ZAPRefact
Pricing modelfreeFreemium with paid tiers
PlatformsDesktop, Cli, ApiVS Code, Web
CategoryCybersecurityDeveloper Tools
Founded20012023

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 OWASP ZAP

  • Intercepting proxy
  • Passive scanner
  • Active scanner
  • AJAX spider
  • Automation Framework
  • Headless daemon and REST API
  • Docker images
  • Add-on marketplace

Only in Refact

  • Autonomous agent workflows
  • IDE chat
  • Real-time code completions
  • GitHub integration
  • Database integration
  • On-premise deployment
  • Multi-LLM support
  • 25+ language support

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

OWASP ZAP

  • Adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handfulnot Refact
  • Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Refact
  • Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Refact
  • Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Refact

Refact

  • Autonomous code generation for development tasksnot OWASP ZAP
  • End-to-end bug fixes and refactoringnot OWASP ZAP
  • Multi-language software development accelerationnot OWASP ZAP
  • Enterprise development with data privacy requirementsnot OWASP ZAP

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

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.

Refact

  • Requires configuration for optimal performance
  • On-premise deployment adds operational complexity
  • Free tier limited by daily agent request quota
  • Coin system adds complexity to cost calculation

Pricing, plan by plan

OWASP ZAP

Free
  • Free & Open SourceFree
    • Full functionality
    • Active & passive scanning
    • Spider

Refact

Free
  • FreeFree
    • Limited daily agent usage
    • Unlimited completions
    • 2,000 coins for agent and chat
  • Pro$10/month
    • 40 daily agent requests
    • 64k context window
    • 10,000 coins monthly
  • Enterprise$undefined/custom
    • On-premise deployment
    • Custom coin allocation
    • Fine-tuning support

Which should you pick?

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.
OWASP ZAP review

Choose Refact if

  • You need autonomous agent workflows.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on VS Code, Web.
  • You also want ide chat.
Refact review

Questions people ask

Is OWASP ZAP or Refact better?
Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Refact at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Refact?
OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Refact at Free.
Does OWASP ZAP or Refact run on more platforms?
OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Refact runs on VS Code, Web.
Can I use OWASP ZAP for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is OWASP ZAP best used for?
OWASP ZAP is most often used for adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handful, manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per tester, teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselves, pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial dast subscription. Of those, adding a baseline security scan to every application's pipeline where per-target commercial licensing would limit coverage to a handful and manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per tester are not what Refact is typically brought in for.
What can OWASP ZAP do that Refact cannot?
OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Refact covers Autonomous agent workflows, IDE chat, Real-time code completions, GitHub integration.

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.

Refact: How many programming languages does Refact support?

Refact supports 25+ programming languages including Python, JavaScript, Go, Rust, Java, C++, and many others.

Source
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.

Refact: Can I deploy Refact on-premises?

Yes. Refact offers on-premise deployment options for organizations requiring complete data control and privacy.

Source
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.

Refact: What LLMs does Refact support?

Refact works with multiple LLMs including Claude, GPT-4, and open-source models, giving you flexibility in model selection.

Source
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.

Share

Related pages

More on OWASP ZAP

More on Refact

Keep looking

Other head to heads