Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Endor Labs vs Syft

Endor Labs logo

Endor Labs

Cybersecurity

Security and AI agent governance for code and supply chain

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: Endor Labs pricing requires contacting sales, no transparent rates; 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: Endor Labs covers AI coding agent governance, Syft covers Multi-format output.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Endor Labs and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where Endor Labs and Syft differ
AttributeEndor LabsSyft
Pricing modelSeat-based per contributing developer with volume discountsOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsWeb, CLI, IDEmacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker
Founded2021Unknown

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 Endor Labs

  • AI coding agent governance
  • SAST scanning
  • Secrets detection
  • Reachability analysis
  • Open source dependency scanning
  • Package firewall
  • MCP server integration

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.

Endor Labs

  • Securing AI coding agent outputs before deploymentnot Syft
  • Reducing SAST false positives with reachability analysisnot Syft
  • Managing open source supply chain risknot Syft
  • Enforcing security policies in CI/CD pipelinesnot Syft

Syft

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

Where each one falls short

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

Endor Labs

  • Pricing requires contacting sales, no transparent rates
  • Developer tier lacks UI and historical scan data
  • Free tier limited to local scanning only
  • Seat-based model may become expensive for large teams

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

Endor Labs

Free
  • DeveloperFree
    • Local scanning
    • Read-only vulnerability data
    • No UI, policies, or scan history

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 Endor Labs if

  • You need ai coding agent governance.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, CLI, IDE.
  • You also want sast scanning.
Endor Labs 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 Endor Labs or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. Endor Labs 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, Endor Labs or Syft?
Endor Labs starts at Free and Syft at Free.
Does Endor Labs or Syft run on more platforms?
Endor Labs runs on Web, CLI, IDE. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Endor Labs for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Endor Labs best used for?
Endor Labs is most often used for securing ai coding agent outputs before deployment, reducing sast false positives with reachability analysis, managing open source supply chain risk, enforcing security policies in ci/cd pipelines. Of those, securing ai coding agent outputs before deployment and reducing sast false positives with reachability analysis are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can Endor Labs do that Syft cannot?
Endor Labs covers AI coding agent governance, SAST scanning, Secrets detection, Reachability analysis. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Endor Labs: What is the difference between Endor Labs Developer and paid tiers?

Developer tier is free and provides local scanning via MCP server with read-only vulnerability access and no UI. Paid tiers (Core and Pro) add team features like policy enforcement, enterprise integrations, reporting, and scan history.

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.

Endor Labs: How does Endor Labs define seats for pricing?

Seats are calculated per contributing developer (those with commits in monitored repositories within the last 90 days). Volume discounts apply as team size grows.

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.

Endor Labs: Does Endor Labs support on-premises deployment?

The platform is cloud-based SaaS by default. Enterprise customers should contact sales to discuss custom deployment options.

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 Endor Labs

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads