terrascan

Pros of Trivy

• Broader scope: Scans containers, filesystems, git repositories, and more, not just IaC
• Faster scanning speed, especially for large projects
• More frequent updates and larger community support

Cons of Trivy

• Less focused on IaC-specific vulnerabilities compared to Terrascan
• May require additional configuration for comprehensive IaC scanning
• Potentially overwhelming output for users primarily interested in IaC issues

Code Comparison

Terrascan example:

terrascan scan -i terraform

Trivy example:

trivy config ./terraform-files

Both tools can scan Terraform files, but Trivy requires specifying the config scanning mode, while Terrascan is more IaC-focused by default.

Summary

Trivy offers a more versatile scanning solution with broader coverage and faster performance, making it suitable for teams looking for a comprehensive security tool. However, Terrascan provides a more specialized approach to IaC scanning, which may be preferable for teams primarily focused on infrastructure security. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements and the desired balance between breadth and depth of scanning capabilities.

Pros of Checkov

• Supports a wider range of infrastructure-as-code (IaC) formats, including Terraform, CloudFormation, Kubernetes, Dockerfile, and more
• Offers a more extensive policy library with over 1000 built-in policies
• Provides integration with CI/CD pipelines and cloud environments for continuous scanning

Cons of Checkov

• May have a steeper learning curve due to its broader scope and feature set
• Can be slower to scan large codebases compared to Terrascan's focused approach

Code Comparison

Terrascan:

resource "aws_s3_bucket" "example" {
  bucket = "my-bucket"
  acl    = "private"
}

Checkov:

resource "aws_s3_bucket" "example" {
  bucket = "my-bucket"
  acl    = "private"
  versioning {
    enabled = true
  }
}

In this example, Checkov's policy library would likely flag the Terrascan example for not enabling versioning, while both tools would pass the Checkov example as it includes versioning configuration.

Pros of Snyk CLI

• Broader scope: Covers more than just IaC, including application dependencies and container security
• Extensive vulnerability database: Provides access to Snyk's comprehensive vulnerability database
• Integration with CI/CD: Offers seamless integration with various CI/CD pipelines

Cons of Snyk CLI

• Requires account: Free tier available, but full features need a paid account
• Resource intensive: Can be slower and more resource-heavy for large projects
• Learning curve: More complex to use due to its broader feature set

Code Comparison

Terrascan:

terrascan scan -i terraform

Snyk CLI:

snyk iac test /path/to/terraform/files

Both tools can scan Terraform files, but Snyk CLI offers a more comprehensive security analysis beyond just Infrastructure as Code.

Key Differences

• Terrascan focuses specifically on IaC security, while Snyk CLI covers a wider range of security concerns
• Terrascan is open-source and free to use, whereas Snyk CLI has a freemium model with paid tiers
• Snyk CLI provides more detailed vulnerability information and remediation advice

Overall, choose Terrascan for focused IaC security scanning, and Snyk CLI for a more comprehensive security solution across multiple aspects of your development pipeline.

Pros of Conftest

• More flexible policy language (Rego) allowing for complex, custom policies
• Supports a wider range of configuration file formats (YAML, JSON, HCL, etc.)
• Can be integrated into various CI/CD pipelines and workflows

Cons of Conftest

• Steeper learning curve due to Rego language complexity
• Less out-of-the-box policies compared to Terrascan
• Requires more manual setup and configuration

Code Comparison

Terrascan policy example:

resource "aws_s3_bucket" "example" {
  bucket = "my-bucket"
  acl    = "private"
}

Conftest policy example:

package main

deny[msg] {
  input.resource.aws_s3_bucket[name]
  not input.resource.aws_s3_bucket[name].acl == "private"
  msg = sprintf("S3 bucket '%v' must have private ACL", [name])
}

Both tools aim to enforce security policies, but Conftest offers more flexibility in policy definition using Rego, while Terrascan provides a simpler approach with pre-defined policies. Conftest's versatility comes at the cost of a steeper learning curve, whereas Terrascan offers easier setup and use with its built-in ruleset.

Pros of cfn_nag

• Specialized for CloudFormation templates, offering deeper AWS-specific checks
• Supports custom rule creation, allowing for tailored security policies
• Integrates well with CI/CD pipelines for AWS-focused projects

Cons of cfn_nag

• Limited to CloudFormation templates, lacking multi-cloud support
• May require more AWS-specific knowledge to use effectively
• Less frequent updates compared to Terrascan

Code Comparison

cfn_nag:

require 'cfn-nag'
cfn_nag = CfnNag.new

violations = cfn_nag.audit_file(filename: 'path/to/cloudformation.yaml')
violations.each do |violation|
  puts "#{violation.type} #{violation.message}"
end

Terrascan:

terrascan init
terrascan scan -i aws -t aws

Summary

cfn_nag is a specialized tool for CloudFormation security scanning, offering deep AWS-specific checks and custom rule creation. However, it's limited to CloudFormation and may require more AWS expertise. Terrascan, on the other hand, provides multi-cloud support and more frequent updates, but may lack the depth of AWS-specific checks that cfn_nag offers. The choice between the two depends on the project's focus and the development team's expertise.

Pros of Gitleaks

• Specialized in detecting secrets and sensitive information in git repositories
• Supports scanning of local repositories and GitHub/GitLab integrations
• Highly customizable with regex patterns and rules

Cons of Gitleaks

• Limited to secret scanning, lacks broader security and compliance checks
• May require more manual configuration for specific use cases

Code Comparison

Gitleaks configuration example:

[[rules]]
description = "AWS Access Key"
regex = '''(A3T[A-Z0-9]|AKIA|AGPA|AIDA|AROA|AIPA|ANPA|ANVA|ASIA)[A-Z0-9]{16}'''
tags = ["key", "AWS"]

Terrascan rule example:

- name: aws_s3_bucket_versioning_not_enabled
  file: s3.tf
  resource: aws_s3_bucket
  check:
    operator: exists
    value: versioning

Summary

Gitleaks focuses on secret detection in git repositories, offering specialized features for this purpose. It excels in identifying sensitive information but lacks broader security checks. Terrascan, on the other hand, provides a more comprehensive approach to infrastructure-as-code security and compliance scanning, covering multiple cloud providers and frameworks. The choice between the two depends on specific security needs and the scope of the project.