Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Sigstore vs Speakeasy

Sigstore logo

Sigstore

Cybersecurity

Free public signing and transparency infrastructure for open source artifacts

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Speakeasy logo

Speakeasy

Cybersecurity

AI control plane for governing enterprise agents, MCP servers, and skills

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Sigstore has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: 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.; Speakeasy no self-serve pricing is published; every plan requires a sales conversation.
  • They diverge on capability: Sigstore covers Fulcio, Speakeasy covers AI tool catalog.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Sigstore and Speakeasy actually diverge.

Attributes where Sigstore and Speakeasy differ
AttributeSigstoreSpeakeasy
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, public instance free to usequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsWeb, Linux, macOS, Windows, Self-hostedweb, api

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 Sigstore

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

Only in Speakeasy

  • AI tool catalog
  • Per-agent identity
  • Role-based access control
  • Real-time policy enforcement
  • Audit logging
  • MDM and SSO integration

What people use each for

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

Sigstore

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

Speakeasy

  • Governing AI agents at enterprise scalenot Sigstore
  • Preventing shadow AI tool sprawlnot Sigstore
  • Enforcing least-privilege access for agentsnot Sigstore
  • Auditing AI tool call activity for compliancenot Sigstore

Where each one falls short

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

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.

Speakeasy

  • No self-serve pricing is published; every plan requires a sales conversation.
  • The product pivoted away from its original SDK-generation offering, so past documentation and customers built on that use case are no longer the focus.
  • Requires integration with an existing identity provider such as Okta or Entra ID to be useful, so it is not a standalone solution.
  • No published free tier or trial pricing was found.

Pricing, plan by plan

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

Speakeasy

On request
  • Enterprise$undefined/mo
    • Custom pricing
    • AI tool catalog and visibility
    • Per-agent identity and access control

Which should you pick?

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

Choose Speakeasy if

  • You need ai tool catalog.
  • You work on web, api.
  • You also want per-agent identity.
Speakeasy review

Questions people ask

Is Sigstore or Speakeasy better?
Neither clearly leads. Sigstore starts at Free and Speakeasy at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Sigstore or Speakeasy?
Sigstore has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Sigstore and On request for Speakeasy.
Does Sigstore or Speakeasy run on more platforms?
Sigstore runs on Web, Linux, macOS, Windows, Self-hosted. Speakeasy runs on web, api.
Can I use Sigstore for free?
Yes. Sigstore has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Speakeasy starts at On request.
What is Sigstore best used for?
Sigstore is most often used for open source projects signing releases without running a certificate authority, organisations meeting a signed-artifact requirement without buying a signing product, publishing provenance that a consumer can verify independently of you, self-hosting the same components where a public log is unacceptable. Of those, open source projects signing releases without running a certificate authority and organisations meeting a signed-artifact requirement without buying a signing product are not what Speakeasy is typically brought in for.
What can Sigstore do that Speakeasy cannot?
Sigstore covers Fulcio, Rekor, Keyless signing, Multi-language clients. Speakeasy covers AI tool catalog, Per-agent identity, Role-based access control, Real-time policy enforcement.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

Speakeasy: How much does Speakeasy cost?

Speakeasy offers an Enterprise tier with features including SaaS catalog integrations, custom server creation, code mode efficiency, and serverless hosting. No specific pricing is published; interested parties contact the company to discuss pricing.

Source
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.

Speakeasy: What is included in Speakeasy's Enterprise plan?

The Enterprise plan includes SaaS catalog integrations, custom server creation, code mode efficiency, and serverless hosting. Customers contact Speakeasy to discuss their specific pricing for these features.

Source
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 Sigstore

More on Speakeasy

Keep looking

Other head to heads