Contents
In brief
A head-to-head of Snyk IaC and Checkov 2.3 on 127 Terraform 1.9 production modules: Checkov found 1,247 unique issues vs Snyk’s 1,039 (~+20%), slightly lower false positives, faster scans. The right tool still depends on DevOps headcount and how much zero-config PR scanning matters.
What happened
The benchmark used AWS c7g.2xlarge, Terraform 1.9.0, default policies, three runs, deduplication, and manual FP review. Test modules injected realistic flaws: public S3 ACLs, Principal: "*", missing encryption, removed blocks with destroy = false, unmarked sensitive terraform_data inputs.
Checkov 2.3.8+ ships policies for TF 1.9 features (removed, terraform_data); the author claims Snyk 1.1290 covers only part of Checkov’s 12 new rules—widest gap on AWS modules (~22%).
Why it matters
IaC scanning is the last cheap gate before prod. Missing a fifth of S3/RDS misconfigs is how “small” incidents happen (one cited fintech had three before migrating).
| Criterion | Snyk | Checkov 2.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Issues (127 modules) | 1,039 | 1,247 |
| Speed | ~12.4 mod/s | ~14.1 mod/s |
| Custom policies | Rego (OPA) | Python / YAML |
| PR setup | GitHub App ~12 min | pre-commit + Actions ~4 h |
| Cost (50 engineers) | ~$12k/yr | $0 OSS / ~$8k enterprise |
In practice
- On Terraform 1.9+, enable
CKV_TF_1–CKV_TF_3forremovedblocks and sensitiveterraform_datainputs. - Small teams (<5 DevOps) — Snyk on PRs plus nightly Checkov batch (~99% coverage in the hybrid pattern from the post).
- Migration — run parallel scans for 30 days, tune FP, align report formats.
- Validate the 20% delta yourself — cloud mix shifts results (AWS largest gap, Azure smallest).
Checkov leads on AWS depth and custom policies; Snyk leads on time-to-PR and unified dashboards with container/SCA.
Takeaway
Mature platform teams on TF 1.9 likely favor Checkov 2.3 for coverage and TCO. Lean DevOps teams may start with Snyk and add Checkov overnight. Run a parallel audit before switching tools—not after an incident.