CVE Binary Tool vs FossID Workbench
| CVE Binary Tool | FossID Workbench | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | No | No |
| Free trial | No | No |
| Paid from | — | — |
| Open source | No | No |
| Platforms | Linux, Windows | Web, Linux |
| Free plan | Yes | — |
| Supported ecosystems | Dart (pubspec.lock); Go (go.mod); Java (pom.xml, JAR/WAR/EAR); JavaScript (package-lock.json, yarn.lock); OpenWrt opkg (.control); Perl (cpanfile); Python (requirements.txt, PKG-INFO, METADATA, .whl, .egg); Rust (Cargo.lock); Ruby (Gemfile.lock); R (renv.lock); Swift (Package.resolved); Windows PE (.pyd) | JavaScript (NPM, Bower, PNPM, Yarn), Java/Kotlin (Maven, Gradle, Ivy, Kotlin), Python (PIP, Pipenv, Poetry, Hatch), Rust/Cargo, Dart/Flutter, PHP/Composer, Ruby/Bundler, Go, C/C++/Conan, CocoaPods/Swift, Yocto, Soong, Elixir, Haskell, .NET, SBT |
| SBOM generation | Yes | Yes |
| Pull request scanning | Yes | Yes |
| Deployment options | self_hosted | hybrid |
Both are listed in Best Software Composition Analysis Software. On Samsung Mobile US Press, CVE Binary Tool scores higher on our published basis.