Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs SST
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
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.; SST primarily optimized for AWS with Cloudflare support
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, SST covers Single config file.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and SST 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 SST
- Single config file
- Resource linking
- Local development
- Multi-cloud support
- Multiple deployment stages
- VPC tunneling
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 SST
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot SST
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot SST
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot SST
SST
- Deploying Next.js frontends with serverless backendsnot OWASP ZAP
- Managing databases and storage alongside application codenot OWASP ZAP
- Creating staging environments for feature testingnot 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.
SST
- Primarily optimized for AWS with Cloudflare support
- Learning curve for developers unfamiliar with infrastructure concepts
- Limited documentation for some advanced use cases
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
SST
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the SST review.
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 SST if
- You need single config file.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on AWS, Cloudflare, Node.js.
- You also want resource linking.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or SST better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and SST at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or SST?
- OWASP ZAP starts at Free and SST at Free.
- Does OWASP ZAP or SST run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. SST runs on AWS, Cloudflare, Node.js.
- 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 SST is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that SST cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. SST covers Single config file, Resource linking, Local development, Multi-cloud support.
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.
SST: Is SST free?
Yes, SST is open source and free. You only pay for cloud resources from AWS and other providers.
SourceOWASP 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.
SST: What cloud providers does SST support?
SST supports over 150 providers through built-in AWS and Cloudflare components, plus Pulumi and Terraform providers.
SourceOWASP 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.
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 Pulumi
- OWASP ZAP vs Serverless Framework
- OWASP ZAP vs Heroku
- OWASP ZAP vs Packer
- OWASP ZAP vs Encore
- OWASP ZAP vs Render
- OWASP ZAP vs Porter
- OWASP ZAP vs Coolify
- OWASP ZAP vs CapRover
- OWASP ZAP vs Terragrunt
- OWASP ZAP vs Zeabur
- OWASP ZAP vs Railway
- OWASP ZAP vs Crossplane
- OWASP ZAP vs Dokku
- OWASP ZAP vs Fastly
- OWASP ZAP vs Flux
- SST vs 1Password
- SST vs Bitdefender Total Security
- SST vs Norton 360
- SST vs LastPass
- SST vs Bitwarden
- SST vs Burp Suite
- SST vs Metasploit
- SST vs Wireshark
- SST vs authentik
- SST vs Authelia
- SST vs Infisical
- SST vs Trivy
- SST vs Feedzai
- SST vs Frontegg
- SST vs HashiCorp Boundary
- SST vs JumpCloud
- SST vs McAfee Total Protection
- SST vs Pulumi
- SST vs Serverless Framework
- SST vs Heroku
- SST vs Packer
- SST vs Encore
- SST vs Render
- SST vs Porter
- SST vs Coolify
- SST vs CapRover
- SST vs Terragrunt
- SST vs Zeabur
- SST vs Railway
- SST vs Crossplane
- SST vs Dokku
- SST vs Fastly
- SST vs Flux