Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Falco vs Silent Eight

Falco logo

Falco

Cybersecurity

CNCF-graduated runtime threat detection for Linux and Kubernetes using eBPF

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Silent Eight logo

Silent Eight

Cybersecurity

AI adjudication of sanctions screening and AML alerts

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Falco has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Falco falco detects and alerts but does not block; stopping an attack requires wiring up Falco Talon or your own response tooling, so out of the box a confirmed detection still means a human intervening after the fact.; Silent Eight automated disposition has to clear model risk governance and a regulator, and the shadow running period before auto-close is permitted can consume most of the first year of the contract.
  • They diverge on capability: Falco covers eBPF kernel instrumentation, Silent Eight covers Alert adjudication.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Falco and Silent Eight actually diverge.

Attributes where Falco and Silent Eight differ
AttributeFalcoSilent Eight
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsLinux, Kubernetes, Self-hostedWeb, Linux

Identical on both: 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 Falco

  • eBPF kernel instrumentation
  • System call rules engine
  • Container and Kubernetes context
  • Default rule set
  • Falcosidekick
  • Falco Talon
  • Plugins framework
  • DaemonSet deployment

Only in Silent Eight

  • Alert adjudication
  • Narrative generation
  • Name screening automation
  • Quality assurance
  • Shadow mode
  • Model transparency reporting

What people use each for

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

Falco

  • A platform team that needs to know when a shell is opened inside a production container, which image scanning cannot detect because it happens at runtimenot Silent Eight
  • A regulated business required to evidence host and container intrusion detection on Kubernetes nodes for an auditnot Silent Eight
  • A security team wanting a vendor-neutral detection layer whose rules they can read and modify rather than a black-box agentnot Silent Eight
  • A cluster where a compromised dependency might write to sensitive paths or open unexpected outbound connections, and only kernel-level visibility will catch itnot Silent Eight

Silent Eight

  • A bank whose level one screening team spends most of its time closing obvious false name matchesnot Falco
  • A payments institution with alert volumes growing faster than it can recruit and train analystsnot Falco
  • A compliance function asked by a regulator to demonstrate consistency of alert decisions across offshore teamsnot Falco
  • An institution that has just tightened screening thresholds after an enforcement action and cannot staff the resulting alert increasenot Falco

Where each one falls short

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

Falco

  • Falco detects and alerts but does not block; stopping an attack requires wiring up Falco Talon or your own response tooling, so out of the box a confirmed detection still means a human intervening after the fact.
  • The default rule set is noisy in real clusters and generates a large volume of benign matches from normal operational activity; without weeks of tuning, alert fatigue sets in and the team stops reading the feed, which is the usual failure mode.
  • There is no storage, console, search or case management in the project, so a working detection capability means also running Falcosidekick, an event store, a dashboard and alert routing, all of which you build, host and maintain.
  • The modern eBPF driver requires kernel 5.8 or later; older hosts fall back to the legacy probe or the kernel module, which brings driver-building against kernel headers and the operational fragility that comes with it on every kernel upgrade.
  • Per-node syscall instrumentation carries measurable CPU overhead on busy hosts, and the cost scales with syscall volume rather than with cluster size, so the noisiest and most performance-sensitive workloads are exactly the ones that feel it most.

Silent Eight

  • Automated disposition has to clear model risk governance and a regulator, and the shadow running period before auto-close is permitted can consume most of the first year of the contract.
  • It does not improve detection, so an institution with a poorly tuned monitoring system automates the handling of bad alerts rather than fixing why they exist.
  • Pricing is tied to alert volume, which means efficiency gains elsewhere that reduce alerts also reduce the vendor bill in a way sales teams structure minimums against.
  • The headcount saving is only realised if the institution actually reduces the analyst pool, and many banks redeploy rather than cut, leaving the business case unrealised on paper.
  • As a mid-sized private vendor serving tier one banks, concentration risk cuts both ways; the loss of one large client materially affects the company, and buyers should ask about financial stability during diligence.

Pricing, plan by plan

Falco

Free
  • Falco (open source)Free
    • Apache 2.0 licence, CNCF graduated project
    • eBPF and kernel module drivers
    • Full rules engine and default rule set

Silent Eight

On request
  • Iris$undefined/year
    • Priced by alert volume adjudicated
    • Deploys against existing screening and monitoring systems
    • Shadow mode evaluation period

Which should you pick?

Choose Falco if

  • You need ebpf kernel instrumentation.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
  • You also want system call rules engine.
Falco review

Choose Silent Eight if

  • You need alert adjudication.
  • You work on Web, Linux.
  • You also want narrative generation.
Silent Eight review

Questions people ask

Is Falco or Silent Eight better?
Neither clearly leads. Falco starts at Free and Silent Eight at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Falco or Silent Eight?
Falco has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Falco and On request for Silent Eight.
Does Falco or Silent Eight run on more platforms?
Falco runs on Linux, Kubernetes, Self-hosted. Silent Eight runs on Web, Linux.
Can I use Falco for free?
Yes. Falco has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Silent Eight starts at On request.
What is Falco best used for?
Falco is most often used for a platform team that needs to know when a shell is opened inside a production container, which image scanning cannot detect because it happens at runtime, a regulated business required to evidence host and container intrusion detection on kubernetes nodes for an audit, a security team wanting a vendor-neutral detection layer whose rules they can read and modify rather than a black-box agent, a cluster where a compromised dependency might write to sensitive paths or open unexpected outbound connections, and only kernel-level visibility will catch it. Of those, a platform team that needs to know when a shell is opened inside a production container, which image scanning cannot detect because it happens at runtime and a regulated business required to evidence host and container intrusion detection on kubernetes nodes for an audit are not what Silent Eight is typically brought in for.
What can Falco do that Silent Eight cannot?
Falco covers eBPF kernel instrumentation, System call rules engine, Container and Kubernetes context, Default rule set. Silent Eight covers Alert adjudication, Narrative generation, Name screening automation, Quality assurance.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Falco: Does Falco block attacks?

No. It detects and emits events. Response requires Falco Talon or your own automation on top.

Silent Eight: Does Silent Eight replace our screening system?

No. It consumes alerts from your existing screening and monitoring systems and decides them. The detection layer stays where it is.

Falco: Is Falco owned by Sysdig?

Sysdig created and open sourced it, but it graduated within the CNCF in February 2024, so governance sits with the foundation rather than the vendor.

Silent Eight: Will a regulator accept AI closing alerts?

It depends on your jurisdiction and your model governance evidence. Banks typically run extended shadow mode first and phase auto-closure by alert type.

Falco: What does it cost?

The project is Apache 2.0 with no licence fee. The cost is the storage, routing, tuning and staff time needed to make its output useful.

Silent Eight: Where is the company based?

Singapore, with offices in New York, London and Warsaw.

Falco: What kernel version do I need?

Kernel 5.8 or later for the default modern eBPF driver. Older hosts need the legacy eBPF probe or the kernel module.

Share

Related pages

More on Falco

More on Silent Eight

Keep looking

Other head to heads