Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Descope vs Syft

Descope logo

Descope

Cybersecurity

No-code drag-and-drop authentication platform.

From
Free
Rated
-
Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

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

From
Free
Rated
-

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Descope free tier capped at 7,500 MAU; Pro tier at 10,000 MAU, Growth tier at 25,000 MAU, forcing migration to Enterprise for larger organisations; 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.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Descope and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Descope and Syft differ
AttributeDescopeSyft
Pricing modelfreemiumOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsWeb, iOS, Android, APImacOS, Linux, 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 Descope

Nothing recorded that Syft does not also cover.

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.

Descope

  • Organisations seeking rapid identity implementation without custom developmentnot Syft
  • Companies supporting multiple user types (consumers, partners, AI agents) in single platformnot Syft
  • Multi-tenant B2B2C SaaS applications requiring per-organisation identity policiesnot Syft
  • Teams building passwordless-first authentication experiencesnot Syft
  • Healthcare and regulated industries requiring HIPAA-compliant identity managementnot Syft

Syft

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

Where each one falls short

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

Descope

  • Free tier capped at 7,500 MAU; Pro tier at 10,000 MAU, Growth tier at 25,000 MAU, forcing migration to Enterprise for larger organisations
  • HIPAA compliance only available in Growth tier ($799/mo) and above; not included in lower-priced plans
  • No-code UI builder provides pre-built flows but still requires custom frontend development for fully-branded authentication experiences
  • All paid tiers billed annually; no monthly billing option for commitment-free flexibility
  • Bot protection features available only in Growth tier and above

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

Descope

Free
  • Free ForeverFree
    • 7,500 monthly active users
    • Basic authentication
    • Community support
  • Pro$249/month
    • 10,000 monthly active users
    • Custom domains
    • CI/CD integration
  • Growth$799/month
    • 25,000 monthly active users
    • Bot protection
    • Fine-grained authorisation
  • Enterprise$undefined/month
    • Unlimited monthly active users
    • Tiered discounts
    • Premium support with dedicated CS engineer

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 Descope if

  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android, API.

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.

Questions people ask

Is Descope or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Descope 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, Descope or Syft?
Descope starts at Free and Syft at Free.
Does Descope or Syft run on more platforms?
Descope runs on Web, iOS, Android, API. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Descope for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Descope best used for?
Descope is most often used for organisations seeking rapid identity implementation without custom development, companies supporting multiple user types (consumers, partners, ai agents) in single platform, multi-tenant b2b2c saas applications requiring per-organisation identity policies, teams building passwordless-first authentication experiences. Of those, organisations seeking rapid identity implementation without custom development and companies supporting multiple user types (consumers, partners, ai agents) in single platform are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Descope do that Syft cannot?
Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Descope: Can I build custom authentication flows without code?

Yes. Descope's drag-and-drop workflow interface allows you to construct and modify signup, login, MFA and SSO flows without code changes.

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.

Descope: Does Descope support AI agent authentication?

Yes. Descope supports building identity journeys for AI agents and MCP servers, including scoped OAuth tokens and delegation chains.

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.

Descope: Is Descope HIPAA compliant?

HIPAA compliance is available in Growth tier and above, starting at $799/month.

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

Other head to heads