Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Restate
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
Restate
Developer Tools
Durable execution engine in Rust with a free tier and low-latency workflows
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
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.; Restate the runtime is under a Business Source Licence rather than an open source licence, so building a competing managed offering on it is prohibited and some procurement functions will reject it on licence grounds alone.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Restate covers Durable execution.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Restate 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 OWASP ZAP
- Intercepting proxy
- Passive scanner
- Active scanner
- AJAX spider
- Automation Framework
- Headless daemon and REST API
- Docker images
- Add-on marketplace
Only in Restate
- Durable execution
- Virtual objects
- Single binary runtime
- Multi-language SDKs
- Workflows and sagas
- Restate Cloud
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 Restate
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Restate
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Restate
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Restate
Restate
- Payment or order flows where a crash between two external API calls must not double-charge or lose the ordernot OWASP ZAP
- AI agent loops that call tools over minutes or hours and must survive a deployment mid-runnot OWASP ZAP
- Replacing hand-rolled retry, idempotency key and outbox code across a set of microservicesnot OWASP ZAP
- A small team that wants durable workflows without operating a Temporal cluster and its databasenot 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.
Restate
- The runtime is under a Business Source Licence rather than an open source licence, so building a competing managed offering on it is prohibited and some procurement functions will reject it on licence grounds alone.
- Restate Cloud jumps from a free fifty thousand actions straight to 300 US dollars a month for twenty million, so a workload sitting at a few hundred thousand actions pays enterprise-shaped money for hobby-shaped volume.
- It is a young project against Temporal’s established base, so hiring engineers who already know it is unrealistic and the answer to most questions is in the docs rather than on Stack Overflow.
- The programming model requires structuring code around durable handlers and virtual objects, which is a genuine rewrite for existing services rather than a library you add.
- The single-binary simplicity that makes small deployments cheap also means fewer operational knobs at very large scale than a system designed as separable components.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Restate
Free- FreeFree
- Fifty thousand durable actions per month
- No credit card required
- Community support
- Starter$300/month
- Twenty million actions per month
- Two hundred actions per second, bursting to one thousand
- Twenty GB storage
- Pro$1000/month
- Fifty million actions per month
- Five hundred actions per second, bursting to two thousand
- Fifty GB storage
- Enterprise$undefined/year
- Negotiated volume
- Twenty-four seven P0 support
- 99.99 per cent SLA
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.
Choose Restate if
- You need durable execution.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Web.
- You also want virtual objects.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or Restate better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Restate at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Restate?
- OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Restate at Free.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Restate run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Restate runs on Linux, macOS, 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 Restate is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Restate cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Restate covers Durable execution, Virtual objects, Single binary runtime, Multi-language SDKs.
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.
Restate: Is Restate open source?
The SDKs are MIT. The runtime is under a Business Source Licence, which permits self-hosting but not offering it as a competing service.
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.
Restate: How does it compare with Temporal?
Same problem, different shape: one Rust binary with embedded storage instead of a server plus database plus workers, and lower per-step latency.
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.
Restate: Is there a free tier?
Yes, fifty thousand durable actions a month on Restate Cloud with no card required.
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.
Restate: Which languages are supported?
TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Go, Python and Rust.
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
- 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
- OWASP ZAP vs Helix
- OWASP ZAP vs Rust
- OWASP ZAP vs Atlantis
- OWASP ZAP vs Jitsu
- OWASP ZAP vs Okteto
- OWASP ZAP vs Argo CD
- OWASP ZAP vs Steampipe
- OWASP ZAP vs Cloud Native Buildpacks
- OWASP ZAP vs Deno
- OWASP ZAP vs Visual Studio Code
- OWASP ZAP vs Turborepo
- OWASP ZAP vs Keycloak
- OWASP ZAP vs Garden
- OWASP ZAP vs GitLab CI/CD
- OWASP ZAP vs HCP Terraform
- OWASP ZAP vs Helm
- OWASP ZAP vs Notepad++
- Restate vs 1Password
- Restate vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Restate vs Norton 360
- Restate vs LastPass
- Restate vs Bitwarden
- Restate vs Burp Suite
- Restate vs Metasploit
- Restate vs Wireshark
- Restate vs authentik
- Restate vs Authelia
- Restate vs Infisical
- Restate vs Trivy
- Restate vs Feedzai
- Restate vs Frontegg
- Restate vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Restate vs JumpCloud
- Restate vs McAfee Total Protection
- Restate vs Helix
- Restate vs Rust
- Restate vs Atlantis
- Restate vs Jitsu
- Restate vs Okteto
- Restate vs Argo CD
- Restate vs Steampipe
- Restate vs Cloud Native Buildpacks
- Restate vs Deno
- Restate vs Visual Studio Code
- Restate vs Turborepo
- Restate vs Keycloak
- Restate vs Garden
- Restate vs GitLab CI/CD
- Restate vs HCP Terraform
- Restate vs Helm
- Restate vs Notepad++