Greenbone (OpenVAS) vs OWASP ZAP
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, ratings, and alternatives.
Greenbone develops the OpenVAS vulnerability scanning engine, one of the most widely deployed open-source vulnerability management systems, used to discover assets and identify security weaknesses across desktops, servers, network devices, and IoT/industrial equipment before attackers can exploit them. Its enterprise feed grows continuously and includes over 100,000 vulnerability tests, with automated, schedulable scans and severity-based prioritization of findings. Greenbone offers several deployment paths: a free, open-source OpenVAS edition for self-hosting, an entry-level cloud/SaaS option (OpenVAS Basic) aimed at small businesses with a 14-day free trial, and hardware appliances or virtual-machine images for larger, on-premises enterprise deployments with GDPR-compliant data handling.
ZAP (Zed Attack Proxy) is a free and open-source web application security scanner that started under the OWASP umbrella and is now stewarded by Checkmarx with independent open-source governance. It bills itself as the world's most widely used web app scanner, aimed at both security professionals doing manual penetration testing and developers who want automated security checks in CI/CD pipelines. ZAP works as an intercepting proxy that can passively and actively scan web traffic for vulnerabilities, and it can be extended through a marketplace of community-built add-ons. Its interface is designed to be approachable for people new to security testing while still offering the automation hooks experienced testers expect, and the project maintains an active GitHub repository ranked among GitHub's top open-source projects.
- Free, open-source edition available for self-hosting
- Very large and continuously updated vulnerability test library
- Deployment options span free software to enterprise appliances
- On-premises option supports GDPR-sensitive environments
- Completely free and open source with no licensing cost
- Widely used and actively maintained with a large contributor community
- Add-on marketplace extends functionality well beyond the core scanner
- Supports both manual pentesting workflows and automated CI/CD scanning
- Enterprise appliance pricing isn't published and requires contacting sales
- Self-hosted free edition demands more setup and maintenance effort
- Interface and workflow are aimed at security practitioners, not general IT staff
- As a free community tool, support is community-driven rather than a dedicated vendor SLA
- Effective use for complex applications still requires security testing expertise
- Reporting and enterprise workflow features are more limited than commercial DAST platforms
More alternatives & similar tools
Alternatives to Greenbone (OpenVAS)
View all →
Vulnerability assessment scanner that finds, prioritizes, and helps remediate security weaknesses.
Alternatives to OWASP ZAP
View all →
Application security platform combining payload-based scanning with ethical hacker research.
Vulnerability management platform behind the widely used OpenVAS scanning engine, from appliance to free edition.
The Verdict
AI-generated from listing dataOWASP ZAP is a free, open‑source web‑app DAST tool focused on manual and CI/CD testing, while Greenbone (OpenVAS) is a broader vulnerability‑management platform with a free self‑hosted option but more setup and infrastructure focus.
Key differences
- •Scope: ZAP scans web applications only; Greenbone scans full infrastructure (servers, desktops, IoT).
- •Deployment model: ZAP is a desktop app; Greenbone requires self‑hosted or appliance deployment.
- •Feature depth: Greenbone offers a large, continuously updated vulnerability test library; ZAP’s tests are limited to common web app flaws.
- •Target audience: ZAP is aimed at security testers/developers; Greenbone targets security teams and IT admins.
- •Support model: ZAP relies on community support; Greenbone provides email/partner support for paid tiers.
Pricing & value
ZAP is completely free with no paid tiers; Greenbone’s enterprise appliance costs are undisclosed and may require purchase.
Ease of use / learning curve
ZAP is designed with an approachable UI for newcomers, whereas Greenbone’s interface targets seasoned security practitioners.
Features & depth
Greenbone provides a massive, continuously updated test library covering infrastructure; ZAP focuses on web‑app specific tests.
Integrations & ecosystem
ZAP offers an extensible add‑on marketplace and API for CI/CD; Greenbone lists no specific integrations.
Collaboration
Greenbone’s enterprise appliance includes workflow features for teams; ZAP’s reporting and enterprise workflow are limited.
Scalability
Greenbone can be deployed on‑premises or as appliances for large environments; ZAP runs as a desktop app, less suited for massive scale.
Support
Greenbone offers email and partner support for paid tiers; ZAP relies on community‑driven support only.
Choose Greenbone (OpenVAS) if…
Security teams needing comprehensive infrastructure vulnerability management and willing to handle self‑hosting or appliance costs.
Choose OWASP ZAP if…
Security testers or developers needing a free, easy‑to‑use web‑app scanner with CI/CD integration.
Common questions
Can I use either tool for automated scans in CI/CD pipelines?
Yes, both provide APIs; ZAP explicitly supports CI/CD automation, while Greenbone’s API is available but integration details aren’t specified.
Which tool has a larger vulnerability database?
Greenbone (OpenVAS) offers an enterprise feed with over 100,000 vulnerability tests; ZAP’s tests are limited to common web‑app issues.
What are the support options if I need help?
ZAP relies on community support only; Greenbone provides email and partner support for its paid offerings.