We performed a comparison between JFrog Xray and Snyk based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like CSPM the most. It captures a lot of alerts within a short period of time. When an alert gets triggered on the cloud, it throws an alert within half an hour, which is very reasonable. It is a plus point for us."
"The solution helped free other staff to work on other projects or other tasks. We basically just had to do a bunch of upfront configuring. With it, we do not have to spend as much time in the console."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"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 most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"The agentless vulnerability scanning is great."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"JFrog Xray's reporting feature has a lot of options in it, including scanning."
"If multiple dependencies and vulnerabilities are found in a project, JFrog Xray is intelligent enough to tell you which vulnerability to target first."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"JFrog Xray shows us a list of vulnerabilities that can impact our code."
"Good reporting functionalities."
"I would say that this solution has helped our organization by allowing us to automate a lot of the processes."
"The most valuable feature of JFrog Xray is the display of the entire internal dependencies hierarchy."
"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 most valuable feature of Snyk is the software composition analysis."
"We're loving some of the Kubernetes integration as well. That's really quite cool. It's still in the early days of our use of it, but it looks really exciting. In the Kubernetes world, it's very good at reporting on the areas around the configuration of your platform, rather than the things that you've pulled in. There's some good advice there that allows you to prioritize whether something is important or just worrying. That's very helpful."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Our customers find container scans most valuable. They are always talking about it."
"It has an accurate database of vulnerabilities with a low amount of false positives."
"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."
"From the software composition analysis perspective, it first makes sure that we understand what is happening from a third-party perspective for the particular product that we use. This is very difficult when you are building software and incorporating dependencies from other libraries, because those dependencies have dependencies and that chain of dependencies can go pretty deep. There could be a vulnerability in something that is seven layers deep, and it would be very difficult to understand that is even affecting us. Therefore, Snyk provides fantastic visibility to know, "Yes, we have a problem. Here is where it ultimately comes from." It may not be with what we're incorporating, but something much deeper than that."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"I want PingSafe to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, PingSafe is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If PingSafe had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"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."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"Since we have been using the solution via APIs, there are some limitations in the APIs."
"Reporting is crucial, but it is lacking in the current tool. Every organization seeks specific data points rather than general information. Therefore, we require customized reports from the Xray tool."
"JFrog Xray does not have a dashboard."
"JFrog Xray's documentation and error logging could be improved."
"The speed of JFrog Xray should improve. Other solutions have better performance."
"I think that the user interface should be expanded to provide customers with a better dashboard for reviewing their feedback regarding their images and the vulnerabilities that are associated with the images."
"Lacks deeper reporting, the ability to compare things."
"It would be great if they can include dynamic, interactive, and run-time scanning features. Checkmarx and Veracode provide dynamic, interactive, and run-time scanning, but Snyk doesn't do that. That's the reason there is more inclination towards Veracode, Checkmarx, or AppScan. These are a few tools available in the market that do all four types of scanning: static, dynamic, interactive, and run-time."
"The reporting mechanism of Snyk could improve. The reporting mechanism is available only on the higher level of license. Adjusting the policy of the current setup of recording this report is something that can improve. For instance, if you have a certain license, you receive a rating, and the rating of this license remains the same for any use case. No matter if you are using it internally or using it externally, you cannot make the adjustment to your use case. It will always alert as a risky license. The areas of licenses in the reporting and adjustments can be improve"
"The solution could improve the reports. They have been working on improving the reports but more work could be done."
"We were using Microsoft Docker images. It was reporting some vulnerabilities, but we were not able to figure out the fix for them. It was reporting some vulnerabilities in the Docker images given by Microsoft, which were out of our control. That was the only limitation. Otherwise, it was good."
"The way Snyk notifies if we have an issue, there are a few options: High vulnerability or medium vulnerability. The problem with that is high vulnerabilities are too broad, because there are too many. If you enable notifications, you get a lot of notifications, When you get many notifications, they become irrelevant because they're not specific. I would prefer to have control over the notifications and somehow decide if I want to get only exploitable vulnerabilities or get a specific score for a vulnerability. Right now, we receive too many high vulnerabilities. If we enable notifications, then we just get a lot of spam message. Therefore, we would like some type of filtering system to be built-in for the system to be more precise."
"Because Snyk has so many integrations and so many things it can do, it's hard to really understand all of them and to get that information to each team that needs it... If there were more self-service, perhaps tutorials or overviews for new teams or developers, so that they could click through and see things themselves, that would help."
"There are some new features that we would like to see added, e.g., more visibility into library usage for the code. Something along the lines where it's doing the identification of where vulnerabilities are used, etc. This would cause them to stand out in the market as a much different platform."
"I think Snyk should add more of a vulnerability protection feature in the tool since it is an area where it lacks."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
JFrog Xray is ranked 18th in Container Security with 7 reviews while Snyk is ranked 5th in Container Security with 41 reviews. JFrog Xray is rated 8.2, while Snyk is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of JFrog Xray writes "An intelligent solution that prioritizes which vulnerability to target first in your project". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". JFrog Xray is most compared with Black Duck, Mend.io, Veracode, Trivy and Fortify Static Code Analyzer, whereas Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, GitHub Advanced Security, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and Aqua Cloud Security Platform. See our JFrog Xray vs. Snyk report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors and best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.
