Microsoft MDASH vs ZeroPath
A side-by-side look at scores, pricing and features — with RECATOOLS' ASEAN-aware verdict for each.
Microsoft MDASH
Multiple models argue over a suspected bug until one can prove it
Visit
|
ZeroPath
AI-native AppSec that verifies findings before flagging them.
Visit
|
|
|---|---|---|
| RECATOOLS Score | 7 / 10 | 7.8 / 10 |
| Capability | ||
| Value for money | ||
| Ease of use | ||
| ASEAN readiness | ||
| API quality | ||
| Pricing | Contact | Freemium |
| Free tier | Public preview — external security teams can run the scanner against their own code | Free plan: unlimited PR scans for 1 repo, 1 full scan/month, core SAST/SCA |
| Paid from | — | Team from $1,000/month base + $60/developer/month (14-day free trial) |
| Has API | ✗ | ✓ |
| Open source | ✗ | ✗ |
| Free to use | ✗ | ✓ |
| Users | — | 1,000+ organisations, 200k+ scans/month (Mar 2026) |
| Founded | 2026 | 2024 |
| Maker | Microsoft | ZeroPath Corp. |
| Verdict | The design is the interesting part. Most AI code-scanning fails on precision rather than recall, and MDASH is engineered around exactly that — agents that debate each other, then a proof-of-concept requirement before a f... |
ZeroPath's LLM-plus-verification pipeline demonstrably catches business-logic and auth vulnerabilities that pattern-matching scanners miss — the Aptos Labs case study (1M+ line Rust codebase, a replay bug that Semgrep, C... |
| Full review → | Full review → |
← Back to AI Directory
Comparisons cover up to 4 tools. Scores are RECATOOLS editorial assessments; verify current pricing on each vendor's site.