Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

OWASP ZAP vs Shufti Pro

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
Shufti Pro logo

Shufti Pro

Cybersecurity

Identity verification and AML screening at the low cost end of the market

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

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.; Shufti Pro rates are not published despite the pay as you go framing, so the cost advantage over premium vendors has to be established through a quote rather than a price list.
  • They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Shufti Pro covers Document verification.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Shufti Pro actually diverge.

Attributes where OWASP ZAP and Shufti Pro differ
AttributeOWASP ZAPShufti Pro
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelfreequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsDesktop, Cli, ApiWeb, iOS, Android
Founded2001Unknown

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 Shufti Pro

  • Document verification
  • Facial biometrics
  • AML screening
  • KYB verification
  • Address verification
  • Age verification
  • Pay as you go option

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 Shufti Pro
  • Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Shufti Pro
  • Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Shufti Pro
  • Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Shufti Pro

Shufti Pro

  • A crypto exchange onboarding users in markets where premium vendors have poor document coveragenot OWASP ZAP
  • A gambling operator needing age assurance at high volume where per-check cost dominates the unit economicsnot OWASP ZAP
  • A gig economy platform verifying couriers whose documents are photographed on low end phonesnot OWASP ZAP
  • A startup that needs verification without signing an annual volume commitment before it knows its volumenot 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.

Shufti Pro

  • Rates are not published despite the pay as you go framing, so the cost advantage over premium vendors has to be established through a quote rather than a price list.
  • Accuracy on difficult document types trails the premium vendors, and the saving per check is often consumed by the manual review headcount handling the additional referrals.
  • The enterprise assurance profile is thinner than that of larger competitors, so regulated bank procurement teams frequently rule it out at the vendor risk stage rather than on capability.
  • Support responsiveness scales with contract size, and pay as you go customers have limited recourse when a document type suddenly starts failing in one market.
  • Country coverage is broad but uneven in depth, meaning the same product can perform very differently across two markets you are launching in simultaneously.

Pricing, plan by plan

OWASP ZAP

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

Shufti Pro

On request
  • Pay as you go$undefined/month
    • Consumption billing with no annual commitment
    • Rate quoted by sales, not published
    • Resubmission sessions stated as not billable
  • Monthly commitment$undefined/month
    • Lower per-verification rate against a volume commitment
    • AML screening and KYB priced as add-ons
    • Free trial available before contracting

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 Shufti Pro if

  • You need document verification.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want facial biometrics.
Shufti Pro review

Questions people ask

Is OWASP ZAP or Shufti Pro better?
Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Shufti Pro at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Shufti Pro?
OWASP ZAP has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for OWASP ZAP and On request for Shufti Pro.
Does OWASP ZAP or Shufti Pro run on more platforms?
OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Shufti Pro 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. Shufti Pro 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 Shufti Pro is typically brought in for.
What can OWASP ZAP do that Shufti Pro cannot?
OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Shufti Pro covers Document verification, Facial biometrics, AML screening, KYB verification.

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.

Shufti Pro: Are failed attempts charged?

Shufti states that resubmission sessions are not charged and that billing follows successful verification attempts. Get that written into the contract, because it materially changes total cost.

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.

Shufti Pro: Is there a published price?

No. Plan structures are published but rates are quoted. Third party estimates put effective cost well below premium vendors.

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.

Shufti Pro: Can we start without a commitment?

Yes. A pay as you go option exists, which is unusual in this category and useful for early stage volume.

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 Shufti Pro

Keep looking

Other head to heads