CRACI vs Snyk

Two different questions

If you already run Snyk, you have a good answer to one question: which of the open-source packages my project declares have known vulnerabilities or license issues, and how do I fix them? Snyk is a software composition analysis (SCA) tool at heart, and it does that job well. It also covers first-party code, container images and infrastructure as code.

CRACI answers a different question: what did this build actually pull in, and from where? CRACI is a CI runner. Your GitHub Actions jobs run on it, and while they run it records every external dependency they fetch. The SBOM, the provenance and the compliance evidence all come from that record.

The two tools sit at different points of the pipeline, which is why this is less a head-to-head and more a map of who covers what.

What Snyk does well

Snyk is built for developers. It runs in the IDE, in the CLI, against your repositories through SCM integrations, and in CI. For open-source dependencies it prioritizes findings with factors such as reachability, exploit maturity and EPSS and CVSS scores, and it can open pull requests that apply the upgrade for you. It monitors projects for newly disclosed vulnerabilities and supports license policies.

Beyond dependencies, Snyk Code (SAST), Snyk Container and Snyk Infrastructure as Code cover ground CRACI does not touch at all. CRACI is not a static analysis tool and does not scan your Terraform. If you need those, Snyk or a similar tool stays in your stack.

Snyk also starts earlier, from the dependencies your project declares, and wraps its fixes in upgrade pull requests, prioritization, IDE feedback and license policies. If you want developers nudged toward upgrades from the editor onward, that is squarely Snyk territory.

Where CRACI differs

It records the build instead of reading the manifest

Snyk builds its dependency tree from the manifest and lockfiles in your project. That works well when the manifest tells the whole story. Builds often do more: they run install scripts, download toolchains, restore caches, pull base images and fetch release binaries with curl.

CRACI sees that activity because it is the runner. A package-aware proxy observes traffic to package sources while the job runs. Detected ecosystems include npm, PyPI, RubyGems, Cargo, Go, Nix, OCI, apt, apk and Git sources, plus download presets. Dependency evidence travels with CI caches, so a package restored from a cache is still accounted for.

CRACI also tells you how complete each SBOM is. Completeness is stated per job and per cache, in five states: Complete, Complete with connections, Incomplete, Unavailable and Not recorded. You know when the record has a gap, instead of assuming it does not.

It controls the build network

Because the build runs on CRACI, you can set an egress policy for it. Policies are default deny or default allow, with 24 built-in software-source presets and typed custom sources for npm, PyPI, apt, apk, the Go proxy, Nix, Cargo, OCI registries and Git. Policies are validated before the job starts and fail closed. CRACI can alert you when a job violates its policy.

A scanner reviews what a project declares. A runtime control limits what the build can reach while it runs. These are complementary layers.

It records the build itself

CRACI generates the SBOM inside its own runner, from what the build actually fetched. The API returns SBOMs, network traces and provenance. CRACI does not sign provenance.

It produces compliance evidence from the same record

For regulations like the EU Cyber Resilience Act, you need to show what is in each release and how you track vulnerabilities in it. CRACI aggregates vulnerabilities across builds and repositories, keeps re-evaluating monitored SBOMs, and exports them as CycloneDX or SPDX. It automates a significant part of the software supply chain visibility and evidence that companies need for their wider CRA compliance process. Read more on CRA evidence and CRA compliance.

An inventory of what is deployed where

CRACI's inventory view shows exactly which software versions are deployed to which products, globally. When a new vulnerability lands, you can see which products run the affected version instead of piecing it together from release notes and spreadsheets.

A note on SBOM access

Snyk can export SBOMs in CycloneDX and SPDX with the snyk sbom command. According to Snyk's documentation, that command is available only to customers on Snyk Enterprise plans. With CRACI, every build on the runner produces an SBOM at no extra charge: CRACI bills only build minutes. See pricing for the current terms.

When to use both

A common setup looks like this:

• Snyk in the IDE and on pull requests, catching vulnerable dependencies, code issues and IaC misconfigurations before merge, and opening fix pull requests.
• CRACI as the runner for your GitHub Actions workflows, recording what each build fetched, enforcing egress policy, producing the SBOM and provenance data for each build, and holding the evidence for audits.

Snyk's GitHub Actions can run on CRACI runners like any other step. CRACI replaces the runner, not GitHub Actions, and runs still appear in the GitHub UI.

Snyk alone fits best if you do not ship software into a regulated market, your builds are simple and manifest-driven, and your priority is fixing known issues quickly. Consider adding CRACI when you need evidence of what went into each release, control over what builds can reach, or SBOMs you can stand behind in an audit.

CRACI and Snyk: common questions

Pricing, SBOM export and where each tool fits

Is CRACI a Snyk alternative?

For part of what Snyk does. CRACI records the SBOM of every GitHub Actions build, keeps re-evaluating monitored SBOMs for new vulnerabilities, and lets security teams triage findings and send them to the team that owns the fix. It does not do SAST, container or IaC scanning, or reachability analysis, so it is an alternative when your question is what each release was built from, not a replacement for Snyk's code scanning.

Does CRACI replace Snyk or work alongside it?

Most teams run them side by side. Snyk works in the IDE and on pull requests, catching vulnerable dependencies, code issues and IaC misconfigurations before merge. CRACI is the runner for your GitHub Actions workflows, recording what each build fetched, enforcing egress policy and producing the SBOM and provenance data. Snyk's GitHub Actions run on CRACI runners like any other step.

How does CRACI pricing compare with Snyk?

They charge for different things. As of September 2026, Snyk has a Free plan, Team from $25 per month, and an Enterprise plan. CRACI charges only for build minutes, $0.002 per vCPU-minute ($0.004 for a default 2 vCPU runner), with no monthly fee and no per-SBOM charge; see pricing for current terms.

Which Snyk plan includes SBOM export?

According to Snyk's documentation, the snyk sbom command, which exports CycloneDX and SPDX, is available only on Snyk Enterprise plans. With CRACI, every build on the runner produces an SBOM, exported as CycloneDX or SPDX with transitive dependencies and a completeness state per job and per cache.

What does Snyk do that CRACI does not?

Snyk Code (SAST), Snyk Container and Snyk Infrastructure as Code cover ground CRACI does not touch. Snyk also prioritizes open-source findings by reachability, exploit maturity, EPSS and CVSS, opens upgrade pull requests, and gives developers feedback in the IDE. CRACI does not offer reachability analysis.

Which CI systems do Snyk and CRACI support?

Snyk runs in the IDE, in the CLI, through SCM integrations and in CI pipelines. CRACI is a runner for GitHub Actions today; other CI systems are on the roadmap, GitLab CI and Jenkins among them. CRACI replaces the runner, not GitHub Actions, so runs still appear in GitHub.

Does CRACI help with the Cyber Resilience Act?

Yes. CRACI records what is in each release, keeps tracking vulnerabilities in it, exports SBOMs as CycloneDX or SPDX, and submits CRA vulnerability notifications on your behalf. It automates a significant part of the supply chain visibility and evidence your CRA process needs; meeting the CRA remains the manufacturer's process. Book a demo to see the evidence from one of your own builds.