Cloud · head to head
SST vs Syft
Syft
Cybersecurity
Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: SST primarily optimized for AWS with Cloudflare support; 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: SST covers Single config file, Syft covers Multi-format output.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which SST and Syft actually diverge.
Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).
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 SST
- Single config file
- Resource linking
- Local development
- Multi-cloud support
- Multiple deployment stages
- VPC tunneling
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.
SST
- Deploying Next.js frontends with serverless backendsnot Syft
- Managing databases and storage alongside application codenot Syft
- Creating staging environments for feature testingnot Syft
Syft
- Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot SST
- Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot SST
- Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot SST
- Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot SST
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
SST
- Primarily optimized for AWS with Cloudflare support
- Learning curve for developers unfamiliar with infrastructure concepts
- Limited documentation for some advanced use cases
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
SST
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the SST review.
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 SST if
- You need single config file.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on AWS, Cloudflare, Node.js.
- You also want resource linking.
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 SST or Syft better?
- Neither clearly leads. SST 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, SST or Syft?
- SST starts at Free and Syft at Free.
- Does SST or Syft run on more platforms?
- SST runs on AWS, Cloudflare, Node.js. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
- Can I use SST for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is SST best used for?
- SST is most often used for deploying next.js frontends with serverless backends, managing databases and storage alongside application code, creating staging environments for feature testing. Of those, deploying next.js frontends with serverless backends and managing databases and storage alongside application code are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
- What can SST do that Syft cannot?
- SST covers Single config file, Resource linking, Local development, Multi-cloud support. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
SST: Is SST free?
Yes, SST is open source and free. You only pay for cloud resources from AWS and other providers.
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.
SST: What cloud providers does SST support?
SST supports over 150 providers through built-in AWS and Cloudflare components, plus Pulumi and Terraform providers.
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.
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.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- SST vs Pulumi
- SST vs Serverless Framework
- SST vs Heroku
- SST vs Packer
- SST vs Encore
- SST vs Render
- SST vs Porter
- SST vs Coolify
- SST vs CapRover
- SST vs Terragrunt
- SST vs Zeabur
- SST vs Railway
- SST vs Crossplane
- SST vs Dokku
- SST vs Fastly
- SST vs Flux
- SST vs Cosign
- SST vs Sigstore
- SST vs Trivy
- SST vs Chainguard
- SST vs Metasploit
- SST vs Wireshark
- SST vs Semgrep
- SST vs Legit Security
- SST vs OWASP ZAP
- SST vs HashiCorp Vault
- SST vs Bitwarden
- SST vs Infisical
- SST vs Tenable Nessus
- SST vs Transmit Security
- SST vs TrustArc
- SST vs Varonis Data Security Platform
- SST vs VMware Carbon Black
- Syft vs Pulumi
- Syft vs Serverless Framework
- Syft vs Heroku
- Syft vs Packer
- Syft vs Encore
- Syft vs Render
- Syft vs Porter
- Syft vs Coolify
- Syft vs CapRover
- Syft vs Terragrunt
- Syft vs Zeabur
- Syft vs Railway
- Syft vs Crossplane
- Syft vs Dokku
- Syft vs Fastly
- Syft vs Flux
- Syft vs Cosign
- Syft vs Sigstore
- Syft vs Trivy
- Syft vs Chainguard
- Syft vs Metasploit
- Syft vs Wireshark
- Syft vs Semgrep
- Syft vs Legit Security
- Syft vs OWASP ZAP
- Syft vs HashiCorp Vault
- Syft vs Bitwarden
- 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