Softwr

Cloud · head to head

Cilium vs Syft

Cilium logo

Cilium

Cloud

eBPF-based networking, observability and security for Kubernetes

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: Cilium requires a recent Linux kernel, which rules out older distributions and some managed environments; 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: Cilium covers eBPF datapath, Syft covers Multi-format output.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Cilium and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Cilium and Syft differ
AttributeCiliumSyft
PlatformsKubernetes, LinuxmacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker
CategoryCloudCybersecurity

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

  • eBPF datapath
  • Identity-based policy
  • Hubble observability
  • Sidecar-free mesh

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.

Cilium

  • Kubernetes networking at a scale where iptables-based CNI performance degradesnot Syft
  • Network policy expressed on workload identity rather than fragile IP rulesnot Syft
  • Seeing which services actually talk to each other, and what policy is droppingnot Syft

Syft

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

Where each one falls short

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

Cilium

  • Requires a recent Linux kernel, which rules out older distributions and some managed environments
  • eBPF is genuinely hard to debug when it misbehaves, and the skill is rare on most teams
  • Broad scope — CNI, policy, mesh, observability — means the learning curve covers several domains at once

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

Cilium

Free
  • CiliumFree
    • 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 Cilium if

  • You need ebpf datapath.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Kubernetes, Linux.
  • You also want identity-based policy.
Cilium 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 Cilium or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Cilium 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, Cilium or Syft?
Cilium starts at Free and Syft at Free.
Does Cilium or Syft run on more platforms?
Cilium runs on Kubernetes, Linux. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Cilium for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Cilium best used for?
Cilium is most often used for kubernetes networking at a scale where iptables-based cni performance degrades, network policy expressed on workload identity rather than fragile ip rules, seeing which services actually talk to each other, and what policy is dropping. Of those, kubernetes networking at a scale where iptables-based cni performance degrades and network policy expressed on workload identity rather than fragile ip rules are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Cilium do that Syft cannot?
Cilium covers eBPF datapath, Identity-based policy, Hubble observability, Sidecar-free mesh. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Cilium: Is Cilium free?

Yes, open source and CNCF-graduated. Isovalent sells an enterprise distribution and support.

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.

Cilium: What does eBPF change?

It lets Cilium run packet-processing programs inside the kernel instead of relying on iptables rule chains, which behave poorly as the number of services grows.

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.

Cilium: Does Cilium replace a service mesh?

It can cover much of what a mesh does without sidecars, though full mesh feature sets still favour Istio or Linkerd.

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 Cilium

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads