Snyk
- Open source 0
- License 0
Compare · Snyk
Proof vs Snyk
Snyk reads CVEs. Proof reads the shall. A refund that exceeds capture is not a vulnerability. Coverity sits on this page.
proof auditNot a Snyk alternative. Keep the scanner. Proof does not ship a CVE inbox.
01 · Answers
How Proof compares to Snyk
The comparison, as a list. Click the instrument for the same split.
- How does Proof compare to Snyk? Snyk is a vulnerability inbox. Proof is a requirement gate. A green Snyk scan can still ship a broken shall.
- Is Proof a Snyk alternative? No. Keep Snyk for CVEs, containers, and known insecure shapes.
- What does Snyk still win? Dependency and container risk at org scale. Coverity sits here, not on a twin.
- We passed Snyk. Why do functional bugs still ship? Because the shall was never a CVE. That is the Proof check.
02 · The distinction
A security finding is a known shape. A correctness finding is a broken shall.
Snyk scores the repo against a vulnerability database: CVEs in dependencies, insecure patterns, licenses, containers. That inbox is real. It is not the promise the software was supposed to keep.
A security scan can be green and the refund can still exceed the capture. That sentence was never in the CVE feed. The tests the agent wrote agree with the function. None of that is a Snyk issue.
Signed requirements live in the repo. proof audit re-reads the source. Coverity sits with Snyk here: known shapes, not a shall. This does not replace a scanner.
03 · The exhibit
Same pull request. Two inboxes. Two answers.
The agent added refunds. The dependency scan is clean. The shall was never a CVE.
The shall
Refunds never exceed capture. Not in the CVE feed.
Not a vulnerabilitySnyk
Still green. The feed never named the refund cap.
PASSEDProof
- STK-REQ-184 refunds never exceed capture
- Verdict not a CVE. CI red.
Same pull request. Two inboxes. Click the tabs.
| Axis | Snyk security finding | Proof correctness finding |
|---|---|---|
| What it reads | Dependencies, containers, and code against a vuln database and rule packs. | Signed requirements in the repo against the source that shipped. |
| Pass means | No open CVE or policy issue above the threshold you set. | Every cited shall still holds. Stale satisfies fails the check. |
| What still ships | A functional bug the CVE feed does not name. Refunds exceed capture. The scan stays green. | Known vulnerability shapes Snyk already covers. Proof does not pretend to be that inbox. |
| What you keep | The vuln UX, SCA graph, and CVE alerts. Keep them. | Requirements as files, findings with a reproducer, a CI exit code. |
| Where they win | Dependency and container risk, at org scale, with a triage inbox teams already know. | One component, held to signed requirements, on every commit. |
Snyk: PASSED Open source vulnerabilities: 0 License issues: 0 proof audit STK-REQ-184 refunds never exceed capture not a CVE. CI red.
04 · The honest loss
Proof does not replace Snyk.
Snyk still wins at the work it was built for: a vulnerability inbox across dependencies, containers, and known insecure shapes, with a UX a whole org already knows.
Keep Snyk for CVEs and containers. Proof does not ship that inbox. A green proof audit is not a claim the code is free of CVEs. A green Snyk scan is not a claim the software still does what you promised. Penetration tests stay with a security firm.