Diwo Provenance vs Snyk. What’s the actual difference?
Scanners tell you your code has bugs. AI-BOMs tell you what AI you ship. Provenance tells the board which of your code was written by AI, whether it’s governed, and shows the regulator the evidence — above whatever scanners you already run.
Provenance is the governance layer for AI in the enterprise across two surfaces — the code AI writes at build time, and how AI agents behave at runtime. It sits above the scanners you already run (GitHub Advanced Security today) and above your runtime monitors (Datadog and event monitoring), correlates them against business criticality and scope decisions, and produces board-grade briefings mapped to the EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF. Its core signal is AI-authorship detection from git/PR metadata across the whole estate.
Snyk is the largest independent developer-security platform — “secure your code from first line to production” — combining SAST (DeepCode), SCA (Open Source), Container and IaC scanning, plus Snyk AppRisk for program reporting. In May 2025 Snyk announced the AI Trust Platform, adding AI-usage-in-code detection and an experimental AI-BOM export (CycloneDX). It is a scanner surface, sold per contributing developer, with a free tier and public Team pricing.
Where the products meet — and where they don’t.
Snyk is the scanner. Provenance is the governance layer above the scanner. They’re structurally complementary. The capability table below reflects that: Snyk is strongest where Provenance is deliberately silent (detection engines, developer-fix workflow), and Provenance is strongest where Snyk is deliberately silent (AI authorship, framework-mapped board evidence, runtime agent governance).
Categorization based on Provenance’s product capabilities (August 2026) and Snyk’s publicly documented AI Trust Platform, AppRisk, DeepCode and AI-BOM materials. Snyk is not a Diwo affiliate; comparisons reflect our reading of the public record and are refreshed before external use.
You need a scanner and a fix workflow developers use.
If your job is to detect vulnerabilities in first-party code (DeepCode), pull in open-source dependency and container risk, catch IaC drift, and get suggested fixes into pull requests that developers actually merge — Snyk is one of the strongest options in the market and has the largest install base to prove it. If you also want an inventory of AI usage embedded in your code and an experimental AI-BOM export, that ships today. And if you’re optimising for developer-visible pricing per contributing developer, Snyk is the clearest unit-economics story in AppSec.
Public pricing: Free tier; Team at $25/dev/mo (contributing developers, 90-day window). Enterprise custom.
Snyk is running. The board still can’t see AI.
If Snyk is already producing findings and the audit committee’s question is still “how much of our code is AI-written, is any of it governed, and can we show that to a regulator?” — that’s a governance question Snyk was not built to answer. Provenance sits above your scanners (GHAS today, Snyk-as-source on the roadmap), correlates their output against AI-authorship signals from git/PR metadata, treats unscanned repos as first-class findings rather than silence, grades the estate against EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF obligations from real evidence, and produces frozen board briefings. When a production agent misbehaves, Provenance attributes the behaviour back to the deployment, PR and author — and records whether the code was AI-authored.
Provenance vs Snyk — the questions buyers ask.
Is Diwo Provenance a replacement for Snyk?
No. Snyk is a scanner platform — SAST (DeepCode), SCA (Open Source), Container and IaC — and increasingly an AI Trust Platform for AI usage inside code. Provenance is a governance layer that sits above scanners and consumes their output. If you already run Snyk, you keep it. Provenance adds a different job on top: AI-authorship detection across the estate, EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF mapping from code evidence, runtime agent-behaviour governance, and board-grade briefings.
Can I run Provenance and Snyk together?
Yes, and it's a natural pairing. Snyk produces per-repo vulnerability, dependency and AI-usage findings. Provenance's shipped scanner integration today is GitHub Advanced Security — Snyk-as-source is a supported direction and follows the same pattern: Provenance correlates the scanner's output against AI-authorship signals, scope classifications and runtime behaviour, and grades the estate against EU AI Act and NIST AI RMF obligations.
Does Snyk do AI-authorship detection?
No. Snyk's AI Trust Platform, announced in May 2025, and its experimental AI-BOM detect AI usage in code — embedded LLM SDK calls, hardcoded AI API keys, agent framework imports — and export them as CycloneDX. It's a components view ("what AI is in this code"), not a per-commit attribution view ("who wrote this code, was it AI?"). Provenance's core signal is the second question, solved with git/PR metadata across the whole estate.
Doesn't Snyk's AI-BOM already cover the EU AI Act?
It covers the transparency/inventory duties around AI components you ship. It doesn't cover the downstream documentation obligations the Commission's GPAI guidance describes — which model was used, what governed generation, what human review occurred, what modifications were made. Provenance derives that evidence from the estate: scan coverage, unreviewed AI merges, signed scope decisions, framework-mapped verdicts.
How does pricing compare?
Snyk publishes a free tier and Team at $25 per contributing developer per month (measured over a 90-day window). Enterprise pricing is custom. Provenance is quoted as an enterprise governance platform (per-org fee with per-estate scaling); it's a different unit than Snyk's per-contributing-developer AppSec unit. Running both is standard — scanner and governance layer are different budget lines.
The decision layer above your scanners.
Provenance connects to your GitHub org and Azure DevOps in minutes. No code changes, no instrumentation. First AI-Code Risk Briefing in a day.