Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Baffle vs Trivy

Baffle logo

Baffle

Cybersecurity

Transparent proxy that encrypts, tokenises and masks database fields without application code changes

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Trivy logo

Trivy

Cybersecurity

Open-source vulnerability and misconfiguration scanner

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Trivy has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Baffle the proxy sits in the production data path, so it becomes a latency contributor and a failure domain, and any deployment needs load and failover testing that customers routinely underestimate.; Trivy reports what public advisory databases know, so coverage varies by ecosystem and unfixed CVEs create noise
  • They diverge on capability: Baffle covers Transparent proxy deployment, Trivy covers Multi-target scanning.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Baffle and Trivy actually diverge.

Attributes where Baffle and Trivy differ
AttributeBaffleTrivy
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsLinux, WebLinux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes

Identical on both: 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 Baffle

  • Transparent proxy deployment
  • Field-level encryption
  • Tokenisation
  • Format-preserving de-identification
  • Dynamic data masking
  • Bring your own key
  • Analytics and pipeline support
  • AI pipeline protection

Only in Trivy

  • Multi-target scanning
  • Vulnerability detection
  • Misconfiguration checks
  • Secret detection

What people use each for

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

Baffle

  • A bank with a legacy application it cannot safely refactor that has an audit finding requiring field-level encryption of account datanot Trivy
  • A company wanting to take a reporting database out of PCI scope by tokenising card fields before they landnot Trivy
  • A healthcare organisation that must ensure database administrators and cloud operators cannot read patient identifiers in the tables they administernot Trivy
  • A team moving regulated data into a warehouse or an AI retrieval pipeline that needs identifiers de-identified in transit without rewriting the ingest jobsnot Trivy

Trivy

  • Failing a pull request when a container image introduces a known CVEnot Baffle
  • Scanning Terraform and Kubernetes manifests for misconfiguration before applynot Baffle
  • Catching committed secrets as part of an existing CI stepnot Baffle

Where each one falls short

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

Baffle

  • The proxy sits in the production data path, so it becomes a latency contributor and a failure domain, and any deployment needs load and failover testing that customers routinely underestimate.
  • What you can still do in SQL depends on the protection mode chosen, and stronger modes restrict comparisons, joins and aggregations on protected columns, which can quietly break existing reports and analytics.
  • Database and driver coverage is finite, so an organisation with an unusual engine, an old driver or heavy use of stored procedures may find its most important system is exactly the one not supported.
  • Pricing is unpublished and scales with protected data stores, which means an enterprise trying to protect a long tail of small databases pays disproportionately compared with protecting a handful of large ones.
  • Key management is your responsibility under bring your own key, and while that is the correct security posture, it moves a real operational burden and a genuine data-loss risk onto the customer.

Trivy

  • Reports what public advisory databases know, so coverage varies by ecosystem and unfixed CVEs create noise
  • No built-in triage or exception workflow, so suppressing accepted risk is managed in config files
  • Findings are point-in-time from CI, with no continuous runtime monitoring unless you add the commercial platform

Pricing, plan by plan

Baffle

On request
  • Baffle Data Protection Services$undefined/year
    • Quoted by protected data stores and deployment scale
    • Self-managed and cloud marketplace deployment options
    • Annual subscription

Trivy

Free
  • TrivyFree
    • Full scanner
    • Unlimited scans
    • Community support

Which should you pick?

Choose Baffle if

  • You need transparent proxy deployment.
  • You work on Linux, Web.
  • You also want field-level encryption.
Baffle review

Choose Trivy if

  • You need multi-target scanning.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want vulnerability detection.
Trivy review

Questions people ask

Is Baffle or Trivy better?
Neither clearly leads. Baffle starts at On request and Trivy at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Baffle or Trivy?
Trivy has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Baffle and Free for Trivy.
Does Baffle or Trivy run on more platforms?
Baffle runs on Linux, Web. Trivy runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes.
Can I use Trivy for free?
Yes. Trivy has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Baffle starts at On request.
What is Baffle best used for?
Baffle is most often used for a bank with a legacy application it cannot safely refactor that has an audit finding requiring field-level encryption of account data, a company wanting to take a reporting database out of pci scope by tokenising card fields before they land, a healthcare organisation that must ensure database administrators and cloud operators cannot read patient identifiers in the tables they administer, a team moving regulated data into a warehouse or an ai retrieval pipeline that needs identifiers de-identified in transit without rewriting the ingest jobs. Of those, a bank with a legacy application it cannot safely refactor that has an audit finding requiring field-level encryption of account data and a company wanting to take a reporting database out of pci scope by tokenising card fields before they land are not what Trivy is typically brought in for.
What can Baffle do that Trivy cannot?
Baffle covers Transparent proxy deployment, Field-level encryption, Tokenisation, Format-preserving de-identification. Trivy covers Multi-target scanning, Vulnerability detection, Misconfiguration checks, Secret detection.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Baffle: Do applications need code changes?

No. That is the central design choice. Baffle intercepts traffic as a proxy rather than requiring an SDK call at every read and write.

Trivy: Is Trivy free?

Yes, open source from Aqua Security with no licence fee. Aqua sells a commercial platform around it.

Baffle: Can you still query encrypted columns?

Partly, and it depends on the protection mode. Some modes preserve equality matching and format, stronger modes restrict what SQL operations remain possible, so this must be tested against your actual queries.

Trivy: What can Trivy scan?

Container images, filesystems, Git repositories, Kubernetes clusters and infrastructure-as-code, for vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, secrets and licences.

Baffle: Does it take systems out of PCI scope?

Tokenisation can reduce scope by ensuring card data never lands in the protected system, but scope reduction is an assessor judgement, not a product setting.

Trivy: Does Trivy need a server?

No. It is a single binary, which is a large part of why it became a default in CI.

Baffle: Who holds the encryption keys?

You do, through your own key management service. Baffle supports bring your own key rather than holding customer keys itself.

Share

Related pages

More on Baffle

More on Trivy

Keep looking

Other head to heads