Defexity vs OWASP ZAP
Last updated
Choose ZAP if you are comfortable with security testing and want a free, scriptable scanner with active attack modes. Choose Defexity if you build with AI tools and want a read-only check in about a minute, plain-language findings with copy-paste fix prompts, privacy and SEO checks, and monitoring after launch.
Side by side
| OWASP ZAP | Defexity | |
|---|---|---|
| Price | Free and open source | Free scan; paid plans from $15/month |
| Setup | Install the desktop app or run Docker | Paste a URL |
| Scan type | Passive baseline and active attack scans | Passive, read-only checks only |
| Permission needed | Active scans need the owner’s permission | Read-only; still scan only sites you own |
| Findings written for | Security professionals | Builders, with AI fix prompts |
| Privacy, accessibility, SEO checks | No | Yes |
| Monitoring and deploy checks | Scriptable in CI | Built in (paid plans) |
Where ZAP is stronger
ZAP’s active scan sends attack payloads and can find injection and other flaws that a read-only check never tries. It is free, extensible and widely used in CI pipelines by security teams.
Where Defexity fits better
If you shipped an app with Cursor, Lovable or Bolt and do not know what a passive alert means, Defexity explains each finding, shows the evidence, gives you a prompt to fix it with the same AI tool, and rechecks it. It also covers production readiness beyond security.
Questions
- Can I use both?
- Yes. Teams often run ZAP’s baseline scan in CI and use Defexity for readiness checks, fix prompts and flow monitoring.
- Does Defexity attack my site?
- No. It only sends normal GET and HEAD requests to public pages and a fixed list of common file paths.
Sources
Defexity reports potential risks it can see from outside your app. It is not a guarantee of security and not legal advice.