Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Cosign vs Refact

Cosign logo

Cosign

Cybersecurity

Signs and verifies container images and artifacts, with or without managing keys

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Refact logo

Refact

Developer Tools

Autonomous AI coding agent for development tasks

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Cosign keyless signing inherits every weakness of the identity provider behind it. Sigstore’s own threat model states that if an identity provider is compromised, Sigstore will issue certificates to those identities, so a compromised account produces perfectly valid signatures.; Refact requires configuration for optimal performance
  • They diverge on capability: Cosign covers Keyless signing, Refact covers Autonomous agent workflows.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Cosign and Refact actually diverge.

Attributes where Cosign and Refact differ
AttributeCosignRefact
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feeFreemium with paid tiers
PlatformsmacOS, Linux, Windows, DockerVS Code, Web
CategoryCybersecurityDeveloper Tools
FoundedUnknown2023

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 Cosign

  • Keyless signing
  • Key and KMS signing
  • Registry-native storage
  • In-toto attestations
  • Offline verification
  • Trusted root and signing config

Only in Refact

  • Autonomous agent workflows
  • IDE chat
  • Real-time code completions
  • GitHub integration
  • Database integration
  • On-premise deployment
  • Multi-LLM support
  • 25+ language support

What people use each for

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

Cosign

  • Signing container images in a build pipeline without managing long-lived private keysnot Refact
  • Attaching a signed bill of materials to a release so consumers can verify its provenancenot Refact
  • Meeting a customer or regulatory requirement for signed artifactsnot Refact
  • Verifying third-party images before they enter an internal registrynot Refact

Refact

  • Autonomous code generation for development tasksnot Cosign
  • End-to-end bug fixes and refactoringnot Cosign
  • Multi-language software development accelerationnot Cosign
  • Enterprise development with data privacy requirementsnot Cosign

Where each one falls short

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

Cosign

  • Keyless signing inherits every weakness of the identity provider behind it. Sigstore’s own threat model states that if an identity provider is compromised, Sigstore will issue certificates to those identities, so a compromised account produces perfectly valid signatures.
  • A signature proves who signed, never whether they should have. The documentation is explicit that Sigstore cannot determine authorisation, so every consumer must write and maintain their own identity and issuer policy or verification means nothing.
  • Nothing is enforced without an admission controller. Signing changes what you can prove, not what runs, and the official policy controller has a small maintainer base for a component sitting in a cluster admission path.
  • Upgrades break pipelines. Version 3 changed defaults, version 4 is announced as removing legacy functionality and roughly half the command line flags, and two official client libraries still lacked support for the new log format as of mid 2026.
  • Signatures do not expire. An artifact signed before a maintainer account was compromised and one signed after are indistinguishable unless somebody is actively monitoring the transparency log, and almost nobody is.

Refact

  • Requires configuration for optimal performance
  • On-premise deployment adds operational complexity
  • Free tier limited by daily agent request quota
  • Coin system adds complexity to cost calculation

Pricing, plan by plan

Cosign

Free
  • CosignFree
    • Apache-2.0
    • Public Sigstore infrastructure free to use
    • No usage limits published

Refact

Free
  • FreeFree
    • Limited daily agent usage
    • Unlimited completions
    • 2,000 coins for agent and chat
  • Pro$10/month
    • 40 daily agent requests
    • 64k context window
    • 10,000 coins monthly
  • Enterprise$undefined/custom
    • On-premise deployment
    • Custom coin allocation
    • Fine-tuning support

Which should you pick?

Choose Cosign if

  • You need keyless signing.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want key and kms signing.
Cosign review

Choose Refact if

  • You need autonomous agent workflows.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on VS Code, Web.
  • You also want ide chat.
Refact review

Questions people ask

Is Cosign or Refact better?
Neither clearly leads. Cosign starts at Free and Refact at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Cosign or Refact?
Cosign starts at Free and Refact at Free.
Does Cosign or Refact run on more platforms?
Cosign runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker. Refact runs on VS Code, Web.
Can I use Cosign for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Cosign best used for?
Cosign is most often used for signing container images in a build pipeline without managing long-lived private keys, attaching a signed bill of materials to a release so consumers can verify its provenance, meeting a customer or regulatory requirement for signed artifacts, verifying third-party images before they enter an internal registry. Of those, signing container images in a build pipeline without managing long-lived private keys and attaching a signed bill of materials to a release so consumers can verify its provenance are not what Refact is typically brought in for.
What can Cosign do that Refact cannot?
Cosign covers Keyless signing, Key and KMS signing, Registry-native storage, In-toto attestations. Refact covers Autonomous agent workflows, IDE chat, Real-time code completions, GitHub integration.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Cosign: Does Cosign tell me if an image is vulnerable?

No. It has no vulnerability knowledge whatsoever. It can carry an SBOM as a signed attestation but never reads it. Pair it with a scanner.

Refact: How many programming languages does Refact support?

Refact supports 25+ programming languages including Python, JavaScript, Go, Rust, Java, C++, and many others.

Source
Cosign: Is signing alone enough?

No. Verification is a command somebody runs. Without an admission controller enforcing it, an unsigned image still runs.

Refact: Can I deploy Refact on-premises?

Yes. Refact offers on-premise deployment options for organizations requiring complete data control and privacy.

Source
Cosign: What does a bare cosign verify actually prove?

Very little. Without a pinned certificate identity and OIDC issuer, it accepts a valid signature from any identity at all.

Refact: What LLMs does Refact support?

Refact works with multiple LLMs including Claude, GPT-4, and open-source models, giving you flexibility in model selection.

Source
Cosign: What is the risk of keyless signing?

Your OIDC provider becomes the root of trust. Compromise of that account yields genuine, verifiable signatures, so account security is the control that matters.

Cosign: Should we expect breaking changes?

Yes. Version 4 is announced to remove roughly half the flags, and a post-quantum migration is named as a further breaking change after that.

Share

Related pages

More on Cosign

More on Refact

Keep looking

Other head to heads