Cybersecurity · head to head
Metasploit vs Syft
Metasploit
Cybersecurity
The world's most used penetration testing framework
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
Syft
Cybersecurity
Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Metasploit the free Framework edition is command line only; the web interface is Pro only; 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: Metasploit covers Exploit database, Syft covers Multi-format output.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Metasploit and Syft actually diverge.
| Attribute | Metasploit | Syft |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing model | freemium | Open source, no licence fee |
| Platforms | Desktop, Cli | macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker |
| Founded | 2000 | Unknown |
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 Metasploit
- Exploit database
- Payload generation
- Post-exploitation
- Evasion modules
- Auxiliary scanners
- Social engineering
- Credential harvesting
- Session management
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.
Metasploit
- Penetration testing and exploit development against known vulnerabilitiesnot Syft
- Validating whether a reported vulnerability is actually exploitablenot Syft
- Running phishing and credential attack simulations on the Pro editionnot Syft
Syft
- Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot Metasploit
- Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot Metasploit
- Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot Metasploit
- Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot Metasploit
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Metasploit
- The free Framework edition is command line only; the web interface is Pro only
- Automated exploitation, automated credential attacks and antivirus evading dynamic payloads are restricted to Metasploit Pro
- Reporting, audit wizards, task chains and closed loop vulnerability validation are Pro only
- Rapid7 publishes no price for Metasploit Pro and routes buyers to contact sales
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
Metasploit
Free- Metasploit Framework (OSS)Free
- Open source
- 1500+ exploits
- Command line
- Metasploit ProFree
- Web interface
- Automated testing
- Phishing campaigns
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 Metasploit if
- You need exploit database.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Desktop, Cli.
- You also want payload generation.
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 Metasploit or Syft better?
- Neither clearly leads. Metasploit 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, Metasploit or Syft?
- Metasploit starts at Free and Syft at Free.
- Does Metasploit or Syft run on more platforms?
- Metasploit runs on Desktop, Cli. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
- Can I use Metasploit for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Metasploit best used for?
- Metasploit is most often used for penetration testing and exploit development against known vulnerabilities, validating whether a reported vulnerability is actually exploitable, running phishing and credential attack simulations on the pro edition. Of those, penetration testing and exploit development against known vulnerabilities and validating whether a reported vulnerability is actually exploitable are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
- What can Metasploit do that Syft cannot?
- Metasploit covers Exploit database, Payload generation, Post-exploitation, Evasion modules. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Metasploit: Is Metasploit Framework free to use?
Yes, Metasploit Framework is available as free open-source software with source code accessible via GitHub. Community support is provided through Slack, GitHub, Twitter, and email.
SourceSyft: 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.
Metasploit: What is the difference between Metasploit Framework and Metasploit Pro?
Metasploit Framework is the free open-source version. Metasploit Pro is a commercial offering with customer support from Rapid7, though specific pricing and features are not detailed on the download page.
SourceSyft: 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.
Metasploit: What support is available for the free Framework version?
Community-based support for Metasploit Framework is available through Slack, GitHub, Twitter, and email ([email protected]). Commercial customers using Metasploit Pro receive customer support from Rapid7.
SourceSyft: 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.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Metasploit vs 1Password
- Metasploit vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Metasploit vs Norton 360
- Metasploit vs LastPass
- Metasploit vs Burp Suite
- Metasploit vs OWASP ZAP
- Metasploit vs Wireshark
- Metasploit vs HashiCorp Vault
- Metasploit vs Bitwarden
- Metasploit vs Semgrep
- Metasploit vs Passbolt
- Metasploit vs RoboForm
- Metasploit vs Sardine
- Metasploit vs Semperis
- Metasploit vs SentinelOne
- Metasploit vs Shufti Pro
- Metasploit vs SentinelOne Singularity
- Metasploit vs Cosign
- Metasploit vs Sigstore
- Metasploit vs Trivy
- Metasploit vs Chainguard
- Metasploit vs Legit Security
- Metasploit vs Infisical
- Metasploit vs Tenable Nessus
- Metasploit vs Transmit Security
- Metasploit vs TrustArc
- Metasploit vs Varonis Data Security Platform
- Metasploit vs VMware Carbon Black
- Syft vs 1Password
- Syft vs Bitdefender Total Security
- Syft vs Norton 360
- Syft vs LastPass
- Syft vs Burp Suite
- Syft vs OWASP ZAP
- Syft vs Wireshark
- Syft vs HashiCorp Vault
- Syft vs Bitwarden
- Syft vs Semgrep
- Syft vs Passbolt
- Syft vs RoboForm
- Syft vs Sardine
- Syft vs Semperis
- Syft vs SentinelOne
- Syft vs Shufti Pro
- Syft vs SentinelOne Singularity
- Syft vs Cosign
- Syft vs Sigstore
- Syft vs Trivy
- Syft vs Chainguard
- Syft vs Legit Security
- Syft vs Infisical
- Syft vs Tenable Nessus
- Syft vs Transmit Security
- Syft vs TrustArc
- Syft vs Varonis Data Security Platform
- Syft vs VMware Carbon Black