Compare

Jibril versus ...

Falco

Feature / Tool	Jibril	Falco
Developer	Garnet Labs	Sysdig (CNCF Graduated)
Primary Focus	LOW overhead Runtime detection and policy enforcement	Runtime threat detection and alerting
Core Technology	eBPF, static and dynamic analysis	eBPF, kernel modules
Detection	Yes (built-in rule based)	Yes (rule-based, real-time)
Enforcement	Yes (eBPF, cgroups)	Limited (via Falco, post-event response)
Policy Definition	Custom rules	Default public rules
Default Policies	Yes (MITRE), complete recipes set	Comprehensive default ruleset
Scope	CI/CD, Containers, VMs, Kubernetes, IoT/Edge, Classic IT	Containers, Kubernetes, cloud, hosts
Observability	JSON events and per agent dashboard	Logs, metrics (via Falco Sidekick), traces
Performance	Lightweight resources use with minimum detection losses	Low latency, High resource use (eBPF)
Integration	Garnet Security, Custom integration with event printers	Broad SIEM support, Falco Sidekick
Use Case	Real-time threat detection, network enforcement	Real-time threat detection, compliance
Strengths	Low overhead, Realtime enforce, Min detect losses, BIG public recipes list	Mature, Wide Adoption, Public ruleset
Weaknesses	No exec enforcement, Less mature, Recipes description lang TBD	Limited Enforcement, Rule Complexity

Tracee

Feature / Tool	Jibril	Tracee
Developer	Garnet Labs	Aqua Security
Primary Focus	LOW overhead Runtime detection and policy enforcement	Runtime detection and forensics
Core Technology	eBPF, static and dynamic analysis	eBPF
Detection	Yes (built-in rule based)	Yes (detailed event tracing)
Enforcement	Yes (eBPF, cgroups)	No (detection only)
Policy Definition	Custom rules	JSON-based policies with scope and rules
Default Policies	Yes (MITRE), complete recipes set	Basic default policy
Scope	CI/CD, Containers, VMs, Kubernetes, IoT/Edge, Classic IT	Containers, Kubernetes, Linux hosts
Observability	JSON events and per agent dashboard	Detailed JSON event logs
Performance	Lightweight resources use with minimum detection losses	High resource use
Integration	Garnet Security, Custom integration with event printers	Trivy, Kubernetes operators
Use Case	Real-time threat detection, network enforcement	Forensics, suspicious event analysis
Strengths	Low overhead, Realtime enforce, Min detect losses, BIG public recipes list	Detailed Forensics, Public signatures, OPA support
Weaknesses	No exec enforcement, Less mature, Recipes description lang TBD	No enforcement, Resource Intensive

Tetragon

Feature / Tool	Jibril	Tetragon
Developer	Garnet Labs	Cilium/Isovalent (CNCF Incubating)
Primary Focus	LOW overhead Runtime detection and policy enforcement	Security observability and runtime enforcement
Core Technology	eBPF, static and dynamic analysis	eBPF
Detection	Yes (built-in rule based)	Yes (real-time observability)
Enforcement	Yes (eBPF, cgroups)	Yes (real-time policy enforcement)
Policy Definition	Custom rules	TracingPolicy CRDs, Kernel level filters
Default Policies	Yes (MITRE), complete recipes set	No preloaded policies, customizable
Scope	CI/CD, Containers, VMs, Kubernetes, IoT/Edge, Classic IT	Kubernetes, Linux hosts, Cilium integration
Observability	JSON events and per agent dashboard	Rich event logs, low-latency observability
Performance	Lightweight resources use with minimum detection losses	Low latency, Resource efficient
Integration	Garnet Security, Custom integration with event printers	Cilium ecosystem, OpenTelemetry
Use Case	Real-time threat detection, network enforcement	Observability, enforcement, network security
Strengths	Low overhead, Realtime enforce, Min detect losses, BIG public recipes list	Low overhead, Enforcement, Cilium Integration
Weaknesses	No exec enforcement, Less mature, Recipes description lang TBD	Less mature, Fewer integrations, Rule complexity

KubeArmor

Feature / Tool	Jibril	KubeArmor
Developer	Garnet Labs	AccuKnox (CNCF Sandbox)
Primary Focus	LOW overhead Runtime detection and policy enforcement	Runtime protection and policy enforcement
Core Technology	eBPF, static and dynamic analysis	eBPF (integration), LSM (AppArmor, SELinux, BPF-LSM)
Detection	Yes (built-in rule based)	Yes (via eBPF logs and alerts)
Enforcement	Yes (eBPF, cgroups)	Yes (inline mitigation via LSM)
Policy Definition	Custom rules	YAML-based Kubernetes-native
Default Policies	Yes (MITRE), complete recipes set	No preloaded policies
Scope	CI/CD, Containers, VMs, Kubernetes, IoT/Edge, Classic IT	Containers, VMs, Kubernetes, IoT/Edge, 5G
Observability	JSON events and per agent dashboard	Logs for policy breaches, process monitoring
Performance	Lightweight resources use with minimum detection losses	Moderate latency
Integration	Garnet Security, Custom integration with event printers	Kubernetes-native, limited SIEM support
Use Case	Real-time threat detection, network enforcement	Hardening workloads, zero-trust enforcement
Strengths	Low overhead, Realtime enforce, Min detect losses, BIG public recipes list	Simplifies LSM complexity
Weaknesses	No exec enforcement, Less mature, Recipes description lang TBD	Lacks default policies, Higher Latencies

Kubescape

Feature / Tool	Jibril	Kubescape
Developer	Garnet Labs	ARMO
Primary Focus	LOW overhead Runtime detection and policy enforcement	Kubernetes security scanning and compliance
Core Technology	eBPF, static and dynamic analysis	Static analysis, Kubernetes API, optional runtime (via integrations)
Detection	Yes (built-in rule based)	Yes (misconfig detection, vuln scanning)
Enforcement	Yes (eBPF, cgroups)	Limited (via integration with tools like KubeArmor)
Policy Definition	Custom rules	YAML-based (OPA, NSA, MITRE frameworks)
Default Policies	Yes (MITRE), complete recipes set	Yes (NSA, MITRE, custom frameworks)
Scope	CI/CD, Containers, VMs, Kubernetes, IoT/Edge, Classic IT	Kubernetes clusters, workloads
Observability	JSON events and per agent dashboard	Reports, dashboards, runtime insights (via integrations)
Performance	Lightweight resources use with minimum detection losses	Lightweight (static), runtime depends on integrations
Integration	Garnet Security, Custom integration with event printers	Helm, CI/CD, KubeArmor, Prometheus
Use Case	Real-time threat detection, network enforcement	Compliance, misconfiguration detection, vuln management
Strengths	Low overhead, Realtime enforce, Min detect losses, BIG public recipes list	Easy compliance checks, broad framework support
Weaknesses	No exec enforcement, Less mature, Recipes description lang TBD	Limited Enforcement, Relies on Integrations