Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Authelia vs Syft

Authelia logo

Authelia

Cybersecurity

Open-source authentication and two-factor portal for reverse proxies

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Authelia depends on a reverse proxy: it is not a standalone identity provider; Syft lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • They diverge on capability: Authelia covers Reverse proxy integration, Syft covers Multi-format output.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Authelia and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Authelia and Syft differ
AttributeAutheliaSyft
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedmacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker

Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (Open source, no licence fee), 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 Authelia

  • Reverse proxy integration
  • Two-factor authentication
  • Access control rules
  • Lightweight backends

Only in Syft

  • Multi-format output
  • Broad ecosystem coverage
  • Binary classifiers
  • In-toto attestations
  • Library and CLI
  • Pairs with Grype

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Authelia

  • Putting a login and 2FA in front of self-hosted services that have nonenot Syft
  • Adding SSO across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platformnot Syft
  • Home and small-team infrastructure behind a single reverse proxynot Syft

Syft

  • Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot Authelia
  • Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot Authelia
  • Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot Authelia
  • Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot Authelia

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Authelia

  • Depends on a reverse proxy: it is not a standalone identity provider
  • Configuration is YAML-first with no administrative interface, so changes mean editing files
  • Not a full IAM: user management, provisioning and federation are limited compared with Keycloak
  • Scales poorly as an organisation-wide identity solution, which is not its target

Syft

  • Lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • Fidelity varies sharply by ecosystem. Conan for C and C++, Haskell and Terraform get cataloguer support with no licence data, no dependency relationships and no file ownership, so a C and C++ shop gets the least from it.
  • Binary classification yields no licence or dependency metadata, and vendored or statically linked code is exactly where supply chain risk hides, so the blind spot and the risk overlap.
  • Incorrect CPE values and CPE collisions are recorded as open issues, and since Grype matches on CPE and PURL, an inventory error becomes a false negative in the security report downstream.
  • An inventory is not a risk assessment. Even a perfect bill of materials says a vulnerable version is present, never that the vulnerable function is called, and the triage burden lands entirely on the reader.

Pricing, plan by plan

Authelia

Free
  • AutheliaFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

Syft

Free
  • SyftFree
    • Apache-2.0
    • No usage limits
    • Community support
  • Anchore Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Policy enforcement and reporting
    • Federal and commercial tiers
    • Pricing not published, quoted on request

Which should you pick?

Choose Authelia if

  • You need reverse proxy integration.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted.
  • You also want two-factor authentication.
Authelia review

Choose Syft if

  • You need multi-format output.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want broad ecosystem coverage.
Syft review

Questions people ask

Is Authelia or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Authelia starts at Free and Syft at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Authelia or Syft?
Authelia starts at Free and Syft at Free.
Does Authelia or Syft run on more platforms?
Authelia runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Authelia for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Authelia best used for?
Authelia is most often used for putting a login and 2fa in front of self-hosted services that have none, adding sso across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platform, home and small-team infrastructure behind a single reverse proxy. Of those, putting a login and 2fa in front of self-hosted services that have none and adding sso across a small set of internal tools without a full identity platform are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Authelia do that Syft cannot?
Authelia covers Reverse proxy integration, Two-factor authentication, Access control rules, Lightweight backends. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Authelia: Is Authelia free?

Yes, open source with no licence fee.

Syft: Does Syft find vulnerabilities?

No. It produces an inventory. Grype, from the same company, matches that inventory against vulnerability feeds. They are separate tools and the distinction is frequently lost.

Authelia: Does Authelia need a reverse proxy?

Yes. It integrates through forward authentication with Nginx, Traefik, Caddy or HAProxy rather than sitting in front of traffic itself.

Syft: Does anything in the Anchore stack do reachability analysis?

No. Neither Syft, Grype nor the commercial Anchore platform performs call graph or reachability analysis, so none of them tells you whether a vulnerable code path is actually invoked.

Authelia: Authelia or Keycloak?

Authelia is far lighter and aimed at protecting self-hosted services behind a proxy. Keycloak is a full identity and access management platform, and much more to run.

Syft: Is it a CNCF or OpenSSF project?

No. It is single-vendor open source owned by Anchore, with no foundation governance. That is a different licence risk profile from Sigstore.

Syft: What does Anchore Enterprise cost?

Not published. The pricing page is contact-sales only, with named but unpriced commercial and federal tiers.

Syft: How do I know my SBOM is complete?

You largely cannot, which is the honest answer. Silent partial parsing is a known open defect, so a bill of materials used for compliance should be spot-checked against a known dependency list.

Share

Related pages

More on Authelia

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads