Attestd vs Snyk
Snyk scans a project and returns a list of issues: CVEs, license problems, and malicious packages, each scored and explained for a person to review. Attestd answers one question about one package version and returns a deterministic verdict. The two solve different problems for different consumers.
Query shape: a project scan vs a single lookup
Snyk Open Source runs against a manifest and returns every known issue. Built for a person or CI job reviewing an entire codebase before merge. Malicious packages filed as CWE-506.
Attestd /v1/check takes one product and version, returns risk_state, actively_exploited, supply_chain.compromised, typosquat. No manifest.
Malicious-package detection exists in both. Snyk via registry monitoring and sandbox. Attestd via OSV MAL advisories as an independent boolean.
{
"issues": [{
"id": "SNYK-JS-EXAMPLE-1234567",
"title": "Prototype Pollution",
"severity": "high",
"cvssScore": 7.4,
"identifiers": { "CVE": ["CVE-2024-XXXXX"] },
"isUpgradable": true,
"fixedIn": ["2.1.0"]
}]
}Per-project issue list from a manifest scan. Severity and upgrade advice, no single verdict field.
{
"risk_state": "high",
"actively_exploited": false,
"patch_available": true,
"fixed_version": "2.1.0",
"supply_chain": {
"compromised": false
}
}One product, one version, one call. No manifest required.
This is not theoretical
Snyk's advisory model covers packages with a CVE or a filed malicious-package issue. Four incidents in Attestd's public detection ledger had no CVE and no OSV entry at the time of compromise. They returned risk_state: none, clean on every CVE check, flagged only by the supply chain signal.
- →90+ @mastra packages compromised with no CVEs
- →Two @joyfill packages delivering a RAT with no postinstall hook
- →debug and chalk, an estimated 10% of cloud environments exposed within two hours
- →ViteVenom: six packages using blockchain C2 built to survive takedown
All four return supply_chain.compromised: true in the same Attestd call as risk_state. None required a project scan or a second lookup.
What you get from each
| Feature | Snyk | attestd |
|---|---|---|
| Query shape | Manifest / project scan | Single product@version lookup |
| Output type | Per-project issue list, CVSS + fix advice | Deterministic fields (risk_state, actively_exploited, supply_chain.compromised) |
| Active exploitation status | Not returned by Open Source scan | Yes (actively_exploited) |
| Malicious package detection | Yes, CWE-506 in issue list, requires project scan | Yes, independent supply_chain.compromised field |
| Autonomous system compatible | Built for CI review and IDE plugins | Yes, designed for agent tool calls and provisioning scripts |
| Free tier | Yes, metered Free plan | Yes (1,000 calls/month) |
| Paid tier | $25/developer/month (Team) | $19.99/month flat |
| Billing model | Per-developer seat, test-metered | Flat rate, no per-seat or credit metering |
Pricing
Attestd Solo is $19.99 per month for 10,000 calls. Snyk Team is $25 per developer per month, metered by test volume. Free tiers solve different problems.
When Snyk is the right choice
Snyk is right when a human or CI job wants a full project issue list with fix PRs and license checks.
When attestd is the right choice
- →You need a yes/no answer about one specific package version, not a scan of an entire project
- →You are building an agent tool, a provisioning script, or any system that checks dependencies one at a time at runtime
- →You want CVE risk, active exploitation, and supply chain compromise in the same call without generating a manifest
- →Your budget is a flat monthly rate rather than a per-seat SaaS contract
Try it in 30 seconds
Get a free API key at the developer portal, then connect Attestd to your coding assistant via the setup docs.
curl "https://api.attestd.io/v1/check?product=nginx&version=1.20.0" \
-H "Authorization: Bearer $ATTESTD_KEY"