We performed a comparison between OWASP Zap and SonarCloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."They offer free access to some other tools."
"The OWASP's tool is free of cost, which gives it a great advantage, especially for smaller companies to make use of the tool."
"It scans while you navigate, then you can save the requests performed and work with them later."
"It has improved my organization with faster security tests."
"Automatic updates and pull request analysis."
"You can run it against multiple targets."
"Simple and easy to learn and master."
"It updates repositories and libraries quickly."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"The reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"SonarCloud is overall a good tool for identifying code smells, bugs, and code duplication, but we've found that using Android Lint is more effective for our needs."
"The solution is unable to customize reports."
"It doesn't run on absolutely every operating system."
"The documentation needs to be improved because I had to learn everything from watching YouTube videos."
"The work that it does in the limited scope is good, but the scope is very limited in terms of the scanning features. The number of things it tests or finds is limited. They need to make it a more of a mainstream tool that people can use, and they can even think about having it on a proprietary basis. They need to increase the coverage of the scan and the results that it finds. That has always been Zap's limitation. Zap is a very good tool for a beginner, but once you start moving up the ladder where you want further details and you want your scan to show more in-depth results, Zap falls short because its coverage falls short. It does not have the capacity to do more."
"I prefer Burp Suite to SWASP Zap because of the extensive coverage it offers."
"The port scanner is a little too slow."
"Reporting format has no output, is cluttered and very long."
"There isn't too much information about it online."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
"The documentation needs improvement on optimizing build time for seamless CI/CD integration with our Android apps."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
OWASP Zap is ranked 8th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 37 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews. OWASP Zap is rated 7.6, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OWASP Zap writes "Great for automating and testing and has tightened our security ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". OWASP Zap is most compared with SonarQube, Acunetix, Qualys Web Application Scanning, Veracode and Rapid7 InsightAppSec, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and Coverity. See our OWASP Zap vs. SonarCloud report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.