Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Grype vs Sigstore

Grype logo

Grype

Cybersecurity

Vulnerability scanner for container images and filesystems

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Sigstore logo

Sigstore

Cybersecurity

Free public signing and transparency infrastructure for open source artifacts

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Grype depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem; Sigstore the security model depends on somebody watching the log. The documentation states that compromise of an identity provider or of Fulcio itself is detectable only if third parties monitor the transparency log, the monitoring tool is a community-tier rather than core project, and almost no consumer runs one.
  • They diverge on capability: Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, Sigstore covers Fulcio.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Grype and Sigstore actually diverge.

Attributes where Grype and Sigstore differ
AttributeGrypeSigstore
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feeOpen source, public instance free to use
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, DockerWeb, Linux, macOS, Windows, Self-hosted

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 Grype

  • Image and filesystem scanning
  • SBOM-driven
  • Wide ecosystem coverage
  • Pipeline friendly

Only in Sigstore

  • Fulcio
  • Rekor
  • Keyless signing
  • Multi-language clients
  • Timestamp authority
  • Neutral governance

What people use each for

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

Grype

  • Re-scanning stored SBOMs as new CVEs are published, without rebuilding imagesnot Sigstore
  • Failing CI when a build introduces a known vulnerabilitynot Sigstore
  • Auditing what is actually installed inside a third-party imagenot Sigstore

Sigstore

  • Open source projects signing releases without running a certificate authoritynot Grype
  • Organisations meeting a signed-artifact requirement without buying a signing productnot Grype
  • Publishing provenance that a consumer can verify independently of younot Grype
  • Self-hosting the same components where a public log is unacceptablenot Grype

Where each one falls short

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

Grype

  • Depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem
  • No triage, exception tracking or reporting UI — that is Anchore’s commercial product
  • Overlaps heavily with Trivy, and most teams pick one rather than running both

Sigstore

  • The security model depends on somebody watching the log. The documentation states that compromise of an identity provider or of Fulcio itself is detectable only if third parties monitor the transparency log, the monitoring tool is a community-tier rather than core project, and almost no consumer runs one.
  • It is a 99.5 percent objective with no service level agreement, which permits several hours of downtime a month and offers no remedy. A pipeline that signs on every build has taken a hard dependency on a free service with no contract behind it.
  • Log scale is a live engineering problem rather than a theoretical one. The active shard holds billions of entries, the log has already been sharded twice, and sharding version 1 requires stopping traffic, which is why a replacement was built.
  • Ten-minute certificates make trust depend on log availability. Verifying an older signature relies on the log entry proving it was made inside that window, so a lost or unreachable entry can render a valid artifact unverifiable.
  • Migration debt is substantial and ongoing. Version 2 of the log is generally available but not the public default, the signing client has an announced breaking release ahead, some official clients lag the new log format, and a post-quantum migration is named as the next break after that.

Pricing, plan by plan

Grype

Free
  • GrypeFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

Sigstore

Free
  • Public good instanceFree
    • Free to everyone with no contract
    • 99.5 percent availability objective, not an agreement
    • 100KB cap per attestation upload
  • Self-hostedFree
    • Apache-2.0
    • Run your own Fulcio and Rekor
    • Rekor v2 available for self-hosters

Which should you pick?

Choose Grype if

  • You need image and filesystem scanning.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want sbom-driven.
Grype review

Choose Sigstore if

  • You need fulcio.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Linux, macOS, Windows, Self-hosted.
  • You also want rekor.
Sigstore review

Questions people ask

Is Grype or Sigstore better?
Neither clearly leads. Grype starts at Free and Sigstore at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Grype or Sigstore?
Grype starts at Free and Sigstore at Free.
Does Grype or Sigstore run on more platforms?
Grype runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker. Sigstore runs on Web, Linux, macOS, Windows, Self-hosted.
Can I use Grype for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Grype best used for?
Grype is most often used for re-scanning stored sboms as new cves are published, without rebuilding images, failing ci when a build introduces a known vulnerability, auditing what is actually installed inside a third-party image. Of those, re-scanning stored sboms as new cves are published, without rebuilding images and failing ci when a build introduces a known vulnerability are not what Sigstore is typically brought in for.
What can Grype do that Sigstore cannot?
Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, SBOM-driven, Wide ecosystem coverage, Pipeline friendly. Sigstore covers Fulcio, Rekor, Keyless signing, Multi-language clients.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Grype: Is Grype free?

Yes, open source from Anchore. Anchore Enterprise is the paid platform around it.

Sigstore: Is the public instance really free?

Yes, with no contract and no paid tier. That is also the weakness: a 99.5 percent objective with no agreement, no remedy and support through Slack.

Grype: What is the difference between Grype and Syft?

Syft generates the software bill of materials; Grype matches that inventory against vulnerability data. They are designed to be used together.

Sigstore: Has the public log moved to Rekor v2?

No. Version 2 reached general availability in October 2025 and self-hosters can use it, but the public instance still defaults to version 1 and the project has said it will for the foreseeable future.

Grype: Grype or Trivy?

They cover similar ground. Trivy is broader out of the box, including misconfiguration and secret scanning; Grype pairs more cleanly with an SBOM-first workflow.

Sigstore: Does Sigstore make my dependencies safe?

No, and this is a category error worth avoiding. It tells you who published something. It has no knowledge of what the artifact contains or whether it is vulnerable.

Sigstore: What are the rate limits?

Not published. Only the 100KB cap per attestation upload is documented, so do not design a high-volume pipeline around assumed throughput.

Sigstore: Should we self-host it?

If a public record of every signature is unacceptable, or if a free service with no agreement cannot sit in your build path, then yes. Otherwise the public instance is what most projects use.

Share

Related pages

More on Grype

More on Sigstore

Keep looking

Other head to heads