Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Blacksmith vs Syft

Blacksmith logo

Blacksmith

Developer Tools

2x faster GitHub Actions with 60% cost savings

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite
Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

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

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Blacksmith per-minute pricing model requires estimating usage to predict costs; 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: Blacksmith covers Bare metal runners, Syft covers Multi-format output.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Blacksmith and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Blacksmith and Syft differ
AttributeBlacksmithSyft
Pricing modelUnknownOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsGitHub Actions, Linux, Windows, macOSmacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker
CategoryDeveloper ToolsCybersecurity

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

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 Blacksmith

  • Bare metal runners
  • Multiple OS support
  • ARM support
  • Docker layer caching
  • Sticky disks
  • GitHub Actions observability
  • Free tier
  • Static IPs

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.

Blacksmith

  • Replacing GitHub Actions runners with faster, cheaper infrastructurenot Syft
  • Accelerating CI build times for organizations with heavy CI loadnot Syft
  • Reducing cloud spend on GitHub Actions by 60% or morenot Syft
  • Supporting ARM architecture builds without GitHub runnersnot Syft

Syft

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

Where each one falls short

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

Blacksmith

  • Per-minute pricing model requires estimating usage to predict costs
  • macOS M4 pricing ($0.08/min) is significantly higher than GitHub Actions
  • Docker layer caching and sticky disks are paid add-ons at $0.50/GB/mo
  • Static IP add-on costs $100/IP/mo

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

Blacksmith

Free
  • Ubuntu x64$0.004/minute
    • 3,000 free minutes per month
    • 2x faster hardware
    • 4x faster cache downloads
  • Ubuntu ARM$0.0025/minute
    • 3,000 free minutes per month
    • 2x faster hardware
    • 4x faster cache downloads
  • Windows x64$0.008/minute
    • 3,000 free minutes per month
    • 2x faster hardware
    • 4x faster cache downloads
  • macOS M4$0.08/minute
    • 3,000 free minutes per month
    • 2x faster hardware
    • 4x faster cache downloads

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 Blacksmith if

  • You need bare metal runners.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on GitHub Actions, Linux, Windows, macOS.
  • You also want multiple os support.
Blacksmith 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 Blacksmith or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Blacksmith 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, Blacksmith or Syft?
Blacksmith starts at Free and Syft at Free.
Does Blacksmith or Syft run on more platforms?
Blacksmith runs on GitHub Actions, Linux, Windows, macOS. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Blacksmith for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Blacksmith best used for?
Blacksmith is most often used for replacing github actions runners with faster, cheaper infrastructure, accelerating ci build times for organizations with heavy ci load, reducing cloud spend on github actions by 60% or more, supporting arm architecture builds without github runners. Of those, replacing github actions runners with faster, cheaper infrastructure and accelerating ci build times for organizations with heavy ci load are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Blacksmith do that Syft cannot?
Blacksmith covers Bare metal runners, Multiple OS support, ARM support, Docker layer caching. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Blacksmith: How much do Blacksmith runners cost compared to GitHub Actions?

Blacksmith offers 60-75% cost savings depending on OS. Ubuntu x64 costs $0.004/min vs GitHub at $0.012/min. All plans include 3,000 free minutes monthly.

Source
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.

Blacksmith: Can I use Docker layer caching with Blacksmith?

Yes, Docker layer caching is available as an add-on at $0.50/GB/mo. Managed Docker layer persistence is included with the base service.

Source
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.

Blacksmith: What is the SLA for Enterprise plans?

Enterprise Blacksmith plans include a 99.9% SLA guarantee along with 24/7 priority support, dedicated Slack channels, white-glove onboarding, and CI optimization support.

Source
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 Blacksmith

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads