We performed a comparison between Sysdig Secure and Snyk based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Sysdig Secure is praised for its compatibility with popular cloud platforms and effectiveness in DevSecOps. Snyk users like its developer-friendly approach, seamless integration, and useful features like software composition analysis. Sysdig Secure could become more effective by streamlining its features and prioritizing specific ones. It could also improve its Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) capabilities and simplify its dashboard. Snyk would benefit from enhancements in compatibility and a revamped vulnerability database.
Service and Support: Customers have praised Sysdig Secure's customer service, highlighting the team's expertise and quick response. Snyk's customer service has received positive feedback from some users, but others have said the support team could do a better job of organizing and prioritizing requests.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Sysdig Secure is straightforward and manageable if the user has expertise or a dedicated team. Some find Snyk's setup to be simple and clear-cut, while others need expert support during the process.
Pricing: Sysdig Secure's costs vary depending on the agents used and the user's environment. Snyk is regarded as pricier than other solutions available, but it's a solid value for large enterprises.
ROI: Snyk provides a cost-efficient solution that has the potential to offset annual subscription costs through early bug resolution. Sysdig Secure users have provided no details about ROI so far.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Snyk over Sysdig Secure. Snyk earns high marks for its developer-oriented approach and advanced functionality. Users like Snyk's seamless integration and handy features, such as software composition analysis. Sysdig Secure users feel that its Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) capabilities could use some work, and some requested a simplified dashboard.
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"PingSafe released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. PingSafe's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of PingSafe is its integration with most of our technology stack, specifically all of our cloud platforms and ticketing software."
"The mean time to detect has been reduced."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"The solution's Open Source feature gives us notifications and suggestions regarding how to address vulnerabilities."
"There are many valuable features. For example, the way the scanning feature works. The integration is cool because I can integrate it and I don't need to wait until the CACD, I can plug it in to our local ID, and there I can do the scanning. That is the part I like best."
"The code scans on the source code itself were valuable."
"It is one of the best product out there to help developers find and fix vulnerabilities quickly. When we talk about the third-party software vulnerability piece and potentially security issues, it takes the load off the user or developer. They even provide automitigation strategies and an auto-fix feature, which seem to have been adopted pretty well."
"The most valuable features are their GitLab and JIRA integrations. The GitLab integration lets us pull projects in pretty easily, so that it's pretty minimal for developers to get it set up. Using the JIRA integration, it's also pretty easy to get the information that is generated, as a result of that GitLab integration, back to our teams in a non-intrusive way and in a workflow that we are already using."
"I find SCA to be valuable. It can read your libraries, your license and bring the best way to resolve your problem in the best scenario."
"The dependency checks of the libraries are very valuable, but the licensing part is also very important because, with open source components, licensing can be all over the place. Our project is not an open source project, but we do use quite a lot of open source components and we want to make sure that we don't have surprises in there."
"Snyk has given us really good results because it is fully automated. We don't have to scan projects every time to find vulnerabilities, as it already stores the dependencies that we are using. It monitors 24/7 to find out if there are any issues that have been reported out on the Internet."
"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."
"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."
"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."
"The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying to do, he proactively takes that as an investigation topic and looks into it. He'll provide the solution even though we might not have asked him to investigate it."
"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."
"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."
"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."
"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"I would like PingSafe to add real-time detection of vulnerabilities and cloud misconfigurations."
"PingSafe is an excellent CSPM tool, but the CWPP features need to improve, and there is a scope for more application security posture management features. There aren't many ASPM solutions on the market, and existing ones are costly. I would like to see PingSafe develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM, CSPM, and CWPP. Another feature I'd like to see is runtime protection."
"Snyk's API and UI features could work better in terms of speed."
"The tool's initial use is complex."
"The tool needs improvement in license compliance. I would like to see the integration of better policy management in the product's future release. When it comes to the organization that I work for, there are a lot of business units since we are a group of companies. Each of these companies has its specific requirements and its own appetite for risk. This should be able to reflect in flexible policies. We need to be able to configure policies that can be adjusted later or overridden by the business unit that is using the product."
"I would like to give further ability to grouping code repositories, in such a way that you could group them by the teams that own them, then produce alerting to those teams. The way that we are seeing it right now, the alerting only goes to a couple of places. I wish we could configure the code to go to different places."
"It lists projects. So, if you have a number of microservices in an enterprise, then you could have pages of findings. Developers will then spend zero time going through the pages of reports to figure out, "Is there something I need to fix?" While it may make sense to list all the projects and issues in these very long lists for completeness, Snyk could do a better job of bubbling up and grouping items, e.g., a higher level dashboard that draws attention to things that are new, the highest priority things, or things trending in the wrong direction. That would make it a lot easier. They don't quite have that yet in container security."
"We would like to have upfront knowledge on how easy it should be to just pull in an upgraded dependency, e.g., even introduce full automation for dependencies supposed to have no impact on the business side of things. Therefore, we would like some output when you get the report with the dependencies. We want to get additional information on the expected impact of the business code that is using the dependency with the newer version. This probably won't be easy to add, but it would be helpful."
"The solution could improve the reports. They have been working on improving the reports but more work could be done."
"All such tools should definitely improve the signatures in their database. Snyk is pretty new to the industry. They have a pretty good knowledge base, but Veracode is on top because Veracode has been in this business for a pretty long time. They do have a pretty large database of all the findings, and the way that the correlation engine works is superb. Snyk is also pretty good, but it is not as good as Veracode in terms of maintaining a large space of all the historical data of vulnerabilities."
"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."
"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."
"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."
"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."
"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."
"Reporting can definitely be better. Live dashboards should be configurable for a longer period of time rather than 30 days. Being able to go back in time to compare six months ago to today would be valuable."
"The dashboard could be more simple and show the more important issues that are detected first. We'd like to be able to set it up so more important issues show up more prominently in the dashboard."
"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Snyk is ranked 5th in Container Security with 41 reviews while Sysdig Secure is ranked 17th in Container Security with 9 reviews. Snyk is rated 8.2, while Sysdig Secure is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sysdig Secure writes "A security scanning tool with great insight on your workloads running anywhere". Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, GitHub Advanced Security, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and Veracode, whereas Sysdig Secure is most compared with Wiz, Sysdig Falco, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector and Qualys VMDR. See our Snyk vs. Sysdig Secure report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
