Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Saviynt
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
Saviynt
Cybersecurity
Cloud identity governance with privileged access in the same platform
- From
- On request
- Free plan
- No
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.; Saviynt implementation typically runs a year or more with a partner, and the cost of that work regularly exceeds the first year subscription, which is rarely in the initial business case.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Saviynt covers Identity governance.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Saviynt 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 Saviynt
- Identity governance
- Access certification
- Segregation of duties
- Privileged access
- Cloud entitlements
- Third party access
- Access request
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 Saviynt
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Saviynt
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Saviynt
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Saviynt
Saviynt
- An enterprise with an audit finding that privileged administrative accounts are excluded from access reviewsnot OWASP ZAP
- A healthcare system governing clinician access to Epic alongside corporate applications in one certification campaignnot OWASP ZAP
- A company that has to prove segregation of duties in SAP to an external auditor every yearnot OWASP ZAP
- A federal contractor needing an identity governance service with FedRAMP authorisationnot 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.
Saviynt
- Implementation typically runs a year or more with a partner, and the cost of that work regularly exceeds the first year subscription, which is rarely in the initial business case.
- Governance quality is limited by HR and application data quality, so organisations with inconsistent joiner records spend the early phases correcting source data rather than certifying access.
- Pricing is per governed identity, so counting contractors, service accounts and non-employee identities materially changes the bill and the definition is worth negotiating explicitly.
- The privileged access module is younger than the governance core and is not a full substitute for a dedicated PAM product in estates with heavy session recording or credential rotation requirements.
- Connectors to less common applications require custom development, and each one adds a maintenance burden that reappears every time the target application changes its API.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Saviynt
On request- Saviynt Identity Cloud$undefined/year
- Priced per governed identity per year
- Modules for governance, privileged access and cloud entitlements
- SaaS delivery with FedRAMP authorised offering available
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.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or Saviynt better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Saviynt at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Saviynt?
- OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for OWASP ZAP and On request for Saviynt.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Saviynt run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Saviynt runs on Web.
- Can I use OWASP ZAP for free?
- Yes. OWASP ZAP has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Saviynt 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 Saviynt is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Saviynt cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Saviynt covers Identity governance, Access certification, Segregation of duties, Privileged access.
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.
Saviynt: Does Saviynt replace a PAM vendor?
It can for time-bound privileged access, but organisations with heavy session recording, credential rotation or legacy server access requirements often keep a dedicated PAM product alongside it.
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.
Saviynt: Is there a FedRAMP authorised version?
Yes, Saviynt offers a FedRAMP authorised government cloud offering, which matters where that is an eligibility requirement rather than a preference.
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.
Saviynt: How is it priced?
Per governed identity per year, quoted. Define carefully whether service accounts and contractors count toward the identity total.
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 One Identity
- OWASP ZAP vs Delinea
- OWASP ZAP vs Omada Identity
- OWASP ZAP vs Netwrix
- OWASP ZAP vs BeyondTrust
- OWASP ZAP vs Doppler
- OWASP ZAP vs Speakeasy
- OWASP ZAP vs Chainguard
- OWASP ZAP vs Fenergo
- OWASP ZAP vs Tenable
- OWASP ZAP vs Hanwha Vision
- OWASP ZAP vs Idira
- OWASP ZAP vs IVPN
- OWASP ZAP vs Logto
- OWASP ZAP vs Malwarebytes
- OWASP ZAP vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint
- Saviynt vs 1Password
- Saviynt vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Saviynt vs Norton 360
- Saviynt vs LastPass
- Saviynt vs Bitwarden
- Saviynt vs Burp Suite
- Saviynt vs Metasploit
- Saviynt vs Wireshark
- Saviynt vs authentik
- Saviynt vs Authelia
- Saviynt vs Infisical
- Saviynt vs Trivy
- Saviynt vs Feedzai
- Saviynt vs Frontegg
- Saviynt vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Saviynt vs JumpCloud
- Saviynt vs McAfee Total Protection
- Saviynt vs One Identity
- Saviynt vs Delinea
- Saviynt vs Omada Identity
- Saviynt vs Netwrix
- Saviynt vs BeyondTrust
- Saviynt vs Doppler
- Saviynt vs Speakeasy
- Saviynt vs Chainguard
- Saviynt vs Fenergo
- Saviynt vs Tenable
- Saviynt vs Hanwha Vision
- Saviynt vs Idira
- Saviynt vs IVPN
- Saviynt vs Logto
- Saviynt vs Malwarebytes
- Saviynt vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint