Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Spacelift
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
Spacelift
Developer Tools
Infrastructure-as-code orchestration for Terraform, OpenTofu, Pulumi and Kubernetes
- 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.; Spacelift users are unlimited and private workers are metered, so deployment concurrency rather than headcount drives the bill, which inverts how most engineering budgets are built and is easy to under-forecast.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Spacelift covers Multi-tool orchestration.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Spacelift 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 Spacelift
- Multi-tool orchestration
- Policy as code
- Private workers
- Spaces
- Blueprints
- Drift detection
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 Spacelift
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Spacelift
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Spacelift
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Spacelift
Spacelift
- Platform teams running infrastructure changes through approval gates rather than through application CInot OWASP ZAP
- Organisations standardising Terraform and OpenTofu across many teams with policy enforcementnot OWASP ZAP
- Estates needing private runners so cloud credentials never leave the networknot OWASP ZAP
- Teams wanting drift detection and reconciliation rather than plan-time checks alonenot 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.
Spacelift
- Users are unlimited and private workers are metered, so deployment concurrency rather than headcount drives the bill, which inverts how most engineering budgets are built and is easy to under-forecast.
- There is no affordable paid entry point. The free tier stops at two users and the next tier is a five-figure commitment with nothing in between.
- Three of the five tiers are quote-only, so a shortlist cannot be costed without entering a sales process with each vendor on it.
- The self-hosted build lags the hosted one, has no public worker pool and lacks the Azure and Google Cloud integrations available in the SaaS product, with OIDC federation offered as the workaround.
- Stacks, Rego policies, Blueprints, Spaces and Spacelift-managed state are proprietary constructs, so leaving means rebuilding the orchestration layer rather than pointing it at a different runner.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Spacelift
Free- FreeFree
- Two users
- Public workers only
- No private workers
- Starter Plus$undefined/year
- Unlimited users
- Two public workers
- One to two private workers
- Business$undefined/year
- Unlimited users
- Three private workers
- Quoted
- Enterprise$undefined/year
- Unlimited users
- Five to thirty private workers
- Self-hosted option
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 Spacelift if
- You need multi-tool orchestration.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Web, Self-hosted, Cloud.
- You also want policy as code.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or Spacelift better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Spacelift at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Spacelift?
- OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Spacelift at Free.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Spacelift run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Spacelift runs on Web, Self-hosted, Cloud.
- 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 Spacelift is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Spacelift cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Spacelift covers Multi-tool orchestration, Policy as code, Private workers, Spaces.
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.
Spacelift: How is Spacelift priced?
By tier and by private worker count rather than per user. Users are unlimited on every paid plan. The published figure on the pricing page carries no period label, and the FAQ describes the tier as an annual subscription, so confirm the period in writing.
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.
Spacelift: Does it support OpenTofu?
Yes, and Spacelift sponsors the OpenTofu project, which is a substantive hedge for anyone avoiding Terraform under the Business Source Licence.
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.
Spacelift: Is there a self-hosted version?
Yes, described as carrying Enterprise functionality, but it is priced on request and lags the hosted product on cloud integrations.
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.
Spacelift: Why not just use the CI system we already have?
That is the real comparison. General purpose CI handles state, drift, approval gates and concurrency control for infrastructure poorly, and whether that is worth a five-figure floor depends on how much infrastructure change your organisation actually ships.
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.
Spacelift: What happens to our pipelines if we leave?
They do not port. Rego policies, Blueprints, Spaces and managed state are Spacelift constructs and the orchestration has to be rebuilt elsewhere.
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 Atlantis
- OWASP ZAP vs Earthly
- OWASP ZAP vs Harness
- OWASP ZAP vs Cortex
- OWASP ZAP vs OpsLevel
- OWASP ZAP vs Backstage
- OWASP ZAP vs Okteto
- OWASP ZAP vs Ona (formerly Gitpod)
- OWASP ZAP vs HCP Terraform
- OWASP ZAP vs Azure DevOps
- OWASP ZAP vs ConfigCat
- OWASP ZAP vs Frappe
- OWASP ZAP vs Cloud Native Buildpacks
- OWASP ZAP vs Cody
- OWASP ZAP vs Dagger
- OWASP ZAP vs Deep Code
- Spacelift vs 1Password
- Spacelift vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Spacelift vs Norton 360
- Spacelift vs LastPass
- Spacelift vs Bitwarden
- Spacelift vs Burp Suite
- Spacelift vs Metasploit
- Spacelift vs Wireshark
- Spacelift vs authentik
- Spacelift vs Authelia
- Spacelift vs Infisical
- Spacelift vs Trivy
- Spacelift vs Feedzai
- Spacelift vs Frontegg
- Spacelift vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Spacelift vs JumpCloud
- Spacelift vs McAfee Total Protection
- Spacelift vs Atlantis
- Spacelift vs Earthly
- Spacelift vs Harness
- Spacelift vs Cortex
- Spacelift vs OpsLevel
- Spacelift vs Backstage
- Spacelift vs Okteto
- Spacelift vs Ona (formerly Gitpod)
- Spacelift vs HCP Terraform
- Spacelift vs Azure DevOps
- Spacelift vs ConfigCat
- Spacelift vs Frappe
- Spacelift vs Cloud Native Buildpacks
- Spacelift vs Cody
- Spacelift vs Dagger
- Spacelift vs Deep Code