Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

authentik vs Grype

authentik logo

authentik

Cybersecurity

Open-source identity provider with flexible authentication flows

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Grype logo

Grype

Cybersecurity

Vulnerability scanner for container images and filesystems

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: authentik smaller project than Keycloak, with a correspondingly smaller community and fewer integration guides; Grype depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem
  • They diverge on capability: authentik covers Configurable flows, Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 29 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which authentik and Grype actually diverge.

Attributes where authentik and Grype differ
AttributeauthentikGrype
Pricing modelOpen-source core with a paid enterprise tierOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedLinux, macOS, Windows, Docker

Identical on both: starting price (Free), 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 authentik

  • Configurable flows
  • Protocol support
  • Application proxy
  • Modern admin interface

Only in Grype

  • Image and filesystem scanning
  • SBOM-driven
  • Wide ecosystem coverage
  • Pipeline friendly

What people use each for

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

authentik

  • Self-hosted SSO across internal services without commercial identity pricingnot Grype
  • Putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxynot Grype
  • Teams who tried Keycloak and wanted something less heavynot Grype

Grype

  • Re-scanning stored SBOMs as new CVEs are published, without rebuilding imagesnot authentik
  • Failing CI when a build introduces a known vulnerabilitynot authentik
  • Auditing what is actually installed inside a third-party imagenot authentik

Where each one falls short

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

authentik

  • Smaller project than Keycloak, with a correspondingly smaller community and fewer integration guides
  • The flow model is flexible but conceptually unfamiliar, and simple setups can feel over-abstracted
  • Enterprise support and some governance features sit behind the paid tier
  • Self-hosted identity is still yours to secure, patch and keep available

Grype

  • Depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem
  • No triage, exception tracking or reporting UI — that is Anchore’s commercial product
  • Overlaps heavily with Trivy, and most teams pick one rather than running both

Pricing, plan by plan

authentik

Free
  • Open sourceFree
    • Full identity provider
    • All protocols
    • Community support

Grype

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

Which should you pick?

Choose authentik if

  • You need configurable flows.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted.
  • You also want protocol support.
authentik review

Choose Grype if

  • You need image and filesystem scanning.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want sbom-driven.
Grype review

Questions people ask

Is authentik or Grype better?
Neither clearly leads. authentik starts at Free and Grype at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, authentik or Grype?
authentik starts at Free and Grype at Free.
Does authentik or Grype run on more platforms?
authentik runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Grype runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
Can I use authentik for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is authentik best used for?
authentik is most often used for self-hosted sso across internal services without commercial identity pricing, putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxy, teams who tried keycloak and wanted something less heavy. Of those, self-hosted sso across internal services without commercial identity pricing and putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxy are not what Grype is typically brought in for.
What can authentik do that Grype cannot?
authentik covers Configurable flows, Protocol support, Application proxy, Modern admin interface. Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, SBOM-driven, Wide ecosystem coverage, Pipeline friendly.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

authentik: Is authentik free?

The open-source edition is free and complete for most use. An enterprise tier adds support and additional features.

Grype: Is Grype free?

Yes, open source from Anchore. Anchore Enterprise is the paid platform around it.

authentik: authentik or Keycloak?

authentik is generally reported as easier to run and administer; Keycloak is more established with a larger community and Red Hat behind it.

Grype: What is the difference between Grype and Syft?

Syft generates the software bill of materials; Grype matches that inventory against vulnerability data. They are designed to be used together.

authentik: Can authentik protect apps with no login of their own?

Yes. Its application proxy places authentication in front of services that have no built-in authentication.

Grype: Grype or Trivy?

They cover similar ground. Trivy is broader out of the box, including misconfiguration and secret scanning; Grype pairs more cleanly with an SBOM-first workflow.

Share

Related pages

More on authentik

More on Grype

Keep looking

Other head to heads