Cybersecurity · head to head
OWASP ZAP vs Termly
OWASP ZAP
Cybersecurity
Free, open-source web application scanner and intercepting proxy, now governed by the Software Security Project.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Termly
Cybersecurity
Legal policy generator and cookie consent banner for small websites
- 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.; Termly a standard plan licenses one website, so an agency or a business with several brand domains multiplies the headline price by the number of sites and the cheap option stops being cheap at four or five domains.
- They diverge on capability: OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Termly covers Policy generator.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which OWASP ZAP and Termly actually diverge.
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 Termly
- Policy generator
- Automatic policy updates
- Consent banner
- Script auto blocker
- Cookie scanner
- Consent log
- WordPress plugin
- Do not sell handling
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 Termly
- Manual penetration testing that needs an intercepting proxy, request replay and fuzzing without a paid licence per testernot Termly
- Teaching developers what an attack against their own endpoint looks like, using a tool they can install themselvesnot Termly
- Pre-release regression scanning of an internal application that would never justify a commercial DAST subscriptionnot Termly
Termly
- A small e-commerce shop that needs a privacy policy, terms and a compliant cookie banner before launch without engaging a solicitornot OWASP ZAP
- A freelance web developer standardising the legal and consent layer across client sites, buying a licence per site or an agency arrangementnot OWASP ZAP
- A WordPress site owner who needs scripts blocked before consent and does not have a tag manager set upnot OWASP ZAP
- A US small business newly in scope for a state privacy law that needs a do not sell opt-out on the site quicklynot 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.
Termly
- A standard plan licenses one website, so an agency or a business with several brand domains multiplies the headline price by the number of sites and the cheap option stops being cheap at four or five domains.
- Generated policies are templates conditioned on questionnaire answers, so they describe the data practices you claimed rather than the ones your code performs, and a regulator comparing the policy to actual tracking finds the gap not the vendor.
- Banner view limits apply on the lower tiers, and a site that spikes in traffic can exhaust its allowance mid month, which is the worst possible moment for consent handling to degrade.
- It covers websites well but has little for mobile apps, so a company with an iOS and Android app alongside its site needs a second consent mechanism and a second consent record.
- There is no data mapping, subject rights automation or vendor inventory, so any company that grows into real privacy programme obligations outgrows Termly entirely rather than upgrading within it.
Pricing, plan by plan
OWASP ZAP
Free- Free & Open SourceFree
- Full functionality
- Active & passive scanning
- Spider
Termly
Free- FreeFree
- 1 basic legal policy
- 10,000 monthly banner views
- Cookie consent banner
- Starter$10/month
- 2 legal policies
- 10 policy edits
- 50,000 monthly banner views
- Pro Plus$15/month
- Unlimited banner views
- Additional legal policies
- Multilingual banners
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 Termly if
- You need policy generator.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want automatic policy updates.
Questions people ask
- Is OWASP ZAP or Termly better?
- Neither clearly leads. OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Termly at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, OWASP ZAP or Termly?
- OWASP ZAP starts at Free and Termly at Free.
- Does OWASP ZAP or Termly run on more platforms?
- OWASP ZAP runs on Desktop, Cli, Api. Termly runs on Web.
- 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 Termly is typically brought in for.
- What can OWASP ZAP do that Termly cannot?
- OWASP ZAP covers Intercepting proxy, Passive scanner, Active scanner, AJAX spider. Termly covers Policy generator, Automatic policy updates, Consent banner, Script auto blocker.
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.
Termly: Does one Termly plan cover all my websites?
No. A standard plan licenses one website. Multiple domains need multiple licences or an agency arrangement, and this is the single most common surprise on the bill.
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.
Termly: Are the generated policies legally sufficient?
They are templates conditioned on your answers and are not legal advice. They are proportionate for a simple site and inadequate where actual data flows are complex or regulated.
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.
Termly: Is there a genuinely free plan?
Yes, one basic policy, one site, 10,000 monthly banner views and quarterly cookie scans, with no card required.
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.
Termly: Does it handle US state privacy opt-outs?
Yes, including a do not sell or share mechanism and regional rule sets, alongside GDPR consent for EU visitors.
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 Osano
- OWASP ZAP vs Transcend
- OWASP ZAP vs OneTrust
- OWASP ZAP vs TrustArc
- OWASP ZAP vs DataGrail
- OWASP ZAP vs iDenfy
- OWASP ZAP vs Eagle Eye Networks
- OWASP ZAP vs Sumsub
- OWASP ZAP vs CyberGhost VPN
- OWASP ZAP vs Surfshark
- OWASP ZAP vs BigID
- OWASP ZAP vs Genetec Security Center
- OWASP ZAP vs Very Good Security
- OWASP ZAP vs VIVOTEK VAST Security Station
- OWASP ZAP vs Windscribe
- OWASP ZAP vs Yoti
- OWASP ZAP vs Avast One
- Termly vs 1Password
- Termly vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Termly vs Norton 360
- Termly vs LastPass
- Termly vs Bitwarden
- Termly vs Burp Suite
- Termly vs Metasploit
- Termly vs Wireshark
- Termly vs authentik
- Termly vs Authelia
- Termly vs Infisical
- Termly vs Trivy
- Termly vs Feedzai
- Termly vs Frontegg
- Termly vs HashiCorp Boundary
- Termly vs JumpCloud
- Termly vs McAfee Total Protection
- Termly vs Osano
- Termly vs Transcend
- Termly vs OneTrust
- Termly vs TrustArc
- Termly vs DataGrail
- Termly vs iDenfy
- Termly vs Eagle Eye Networks
- Termly vs Sumsub
- Termly vs CyberGhost VPN
- Termly vs Surfshark
- Termly vs BigID
- Termly vs Genetec Security Center
- Termly vs Very Good Security
- Termly vs VIVOTEK VAST Security Station
- Termly vs Windscribe
- Termly vs Yoti
- Termly vs Avast One