Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Sticky Password
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Sticky Password
Cybersecurity
Password manager with autofill, digital wallet, and dark web monitoring
- 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.; Sticky Password offers no dedicated family plan, requiring individual licenses or a Teams plan to cover a household.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Sticky Password covers Autofill and capture.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Sticky Password actually diverge.
| Attribute | OWASP ZAP | Sticky Password |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | free | freemium |
| Platforms | Desktop, Cli, Api | web, ios, android, windows, mac |
| Founded | 2001 | Unknown |
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), 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 Sticky Password
- Autofill and capture
- Encrypted vault sync
- Emergency access
- Dark web monitoring
- Password sharing
- Digital wallet
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 Sticky Password
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Sticky Password
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Sticky Password
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Sticky Password
Sticky Password
- Storing and autofilling passwords across devicesnot OWASP ZAP
- Securely sharing a login with a family member or colleaguenot OWASP ZAP
- Granting emergency vault access to a trusted contactnot OWASP ZAP
- Monitoring saved credentials for dark web exposurenot 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.
Sticky Password
- Offers no dedicated family plan, requiring individual licenses or a Teams plan to cover a household.
- Free tier is limited to a 30-day Premium trial rather than a permanent free feature set.
- Lacks the browser-based item history and detailed sharing permissions offered by some larger competitors.
- Business/Teams tooling is lighter than dedicated enterprise password managers with SSO and SCIM support.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Sticky Password
Free- Free (30-day Premium trial)Free
- 30-day trial of Premium features
- Basic password storage after trial
- Premium$2.5/month
- Vault sync across devices
- Password sharing
- Dark web monitoring
- Teams$2.5/month
- Per-user pricing billed annually
- Usable for families or businesses
- Centralized license management
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 Sticky Password if
- You need autofill and capture.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on web, ios, android, windows, mac.
- You also want encrypted vault sync.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or Sticky Password better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Sticky Password at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Sticky Password?
- OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Sticky Password at Free.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Sticky Password run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Sticky Password runs on web, ios, android, windows, mac.
- 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 Sticky Password is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Sticky Password cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Sticky Password covers Autofill and capture, Encrypted vault sync, Emergency access, Dark web monitoring.
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.
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.
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.
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
More on Sticky Password
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 Enpass
- OWASP ZAP vs Keeper Password Manager
- OWASP ZAP vs HashiCorp Vault
- OWASP ZAP vs Kaspersky Total Security
- OWASP ZAP vs Akeyless
- OWASP ZAP vs Doppler
- OWASP ZAP vs Passbolt
- OWASP ZAP vs Milestone XProtect
- OWASP ZAP vs Osano
- OWASP ZAP vs Proton Mail
- OWASP ZAP vs Veriff
- OWASP ZAP vs Brave Browser
- OWASP ZAP vs March Networks
- Sticky Password vs 1Password
- Sticky Password vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Sticky Password vs Norton 360
- Sticky Password vs LastPass
- Sticky Password vs Bitwarden
- Sticky Password vs Burp Suite
- Sticky Password vs Metasploit
- Sticky Password vs Wireshark
- Sticky Password vs authentik
- Sticky Password vs Authelia
- Sticky Password vs Infisical
- Sticky Password vs Trivy
- Sticky Password vs Feedzai
- Sticky Password vs Frontegg
- Sticky Password vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Sticky Password vs JumpCloud
- Sticky Password vs McAfee Total Protection
- Sticky Password vs Enpass
- Sticky Password vs Keeper Password Manager
- Sticky Password vs HashiCorp Vault
- Sticky Password vs Kaspersky Total Security
- Sticky Password vs Akeyless
- Sticky Password vs Doppler
- Sticky Password vs Passbolt
- Sticky Password vs Milestone XProtect
- Sticky Password vs Osano
- Sticky Password vs Proton Mail
- Sticky Password vs Veriff
- Sticky Password vs Brave Browser
- Sticky Password vs March Networks