Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Sardine
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Sardine
Cybersecurity
Device intelligence and behaviour biometrics for fraud and compliance
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- 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.; Sardine signal quality depends on the SDK being embedded in your own web and mobile clients, so fraud improvements become dependent on your app release cycle and any coverage gap is a blind spot.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Sardine covers Device intelligence.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Sardine actually diverge.
Identical on both: 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 OWASP ZAP
- Intercepting proxy
- Passive scanner
- Active scanner
- AJAX spider
- Automation Framework
- Headless daemon and REST API
- Docker images
- Add-on marketplace
Only in Sardine
- Device intelligence
- Behaviour biometrics
- Scam detection
- Onboarding risk scoring
- AML transaction monitoring
- Dispute and chargeback handling
- Rules editor
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 Sardine
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Sardine
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Sardine
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Sardine
Sardine
- A neobank losing money to authorised push payment scams where the customer genuinely approved the transfernot OWASP ZAP
- A crypto exchange trying to detect accounts being operated by remote access rather than by their ownernot OWASP ZAP
- A fintech seeing synthetic identity signups that pass document verification but share device characteristicsnot OWASP ZAP
- A lender wanting first party fraud signals at application time that a credit bureau file does not containnot 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.
Sardine
- Signal quality depends on the SDK being embedded in your own web and mobile clients, so fraud improvements become dependent on your app release cycle and any coverage gap is a blind spot.
- Behavioural and device telemetry collection needs a documented lawful basis under GDPR, and EU privacy reviews frequently delay rollouts that were scoped as engineering work.
- Pricing is per session or per active user, so a consumer product with many low value sessions pays in proportion to traffic rather than to fraud exposure.
- As a younger private company it lacks the enforcement-tested audit history that a bank examiner expects, which makes it a harder sell inside a regulated bank than inside a fintech.
- It is strongest on session-time signals and weaker as a system of record for long horizon AML typologies, so larger institutions end up running it alongside a traditional monitoring platform rather than instead of one.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Sardine
On request- Sardine$undefined/year
- Priced per user session or per monthly active user
- Annual contract with volume commitment
- SDK for web, iOS and Android
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 Sardine if
- You need device intelligence.
- You work on Web, iOS, Android.
- You also want behaviour biometrics.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or Sardine better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Sardine at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Sardine?
- OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for OWASP ZAP and On request for Sardine.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Sardine run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Sardine runs on Web, iOS, Android.
- Can I use OWASP ZAP for free?
- Yes. OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Sardine starts at On request.
- 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 Sardine is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Sardine cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Sardine covers Device intelligence, Behaviour biometrics, Scam detection, Onboarding risk scoring.
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.
Sardine: Does Sardine do document verification?
It focuses on device, behavioural and transaction signals, and integrates identity verification providers rather than being one. Treat it as complementary to a KYC vendor.
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.
Sardine: What does it need from us to work?
An SDK in your web and mobile applications plus transaction feeds. Without the client side collector you lose the signals that differentiate it.
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.
Sardine: Is pricing published?
No. It is quoted, typically per session or per monthly active user with an annual volume commitment.
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
- 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 Unit21
- OWASP ZAP vs Featurespace ARIC Risk Hub
- OWASP ZAP vs NICE Actimize
- OWASP ZAP vs Socure
- OWASP ZAP vs ThetaRay
- OWASP ZAP vs Transmit Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Jumio
- OWASP ZAP vs iDenfy
- OWASP ZAP vs Silent Eight
- OWASP ZAP vs Sumsub
- OWASP ZAP vs Quantexa
- OWASP ZAP vs TunnelBear
- OWASP ZAP vs Vanta
- OWASP ZAP vs Acunetix
- OWASP ZAP vs Aikido
- OWASP ZAP vs Arnica
- Sardine vs 1Password
- Sardine vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Sardine vs Norton 360
- Sardine vs LastPass
- Sardine vs Bitwarden
- Sardine vs Burp Suite
- Sardine vs Metasploit
- Sardine vs Wireshark
- Sardine vs authentik
- Sardine vs Authelia
- Sardine vs Infisical
- Sardine vs Trivy
- Sardine vs Feedzai
- Sardine vs Frontegg
- Sardine vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Sardine vs JumpCloud
- Sardine vs McAfee Total Protection
- Sardine vs Unit21
- Sardine vs Featurespace ARIC Risk Hub
- Sardine vs NICE Actimize
- Sardine vs Socure
- Sardine vs ThetaRay
- Sardine vs Transmit Security
- Sardine vs Jumio
- Sardine vs iDenfy
- Sardine vs Silent Eight
- Sardine vs Sumsub
- Sardine vs Quantexa
- Sardine vs TunnelBear
- Sardine vs Vanta
- Sardine vs Acunetix
- Sardine vs Aikido
- Sardine vs Arnica