Gitsign vs SignPath

Gitsign has no write-up on Specifiction yet; its figures are above.

SignPath provides code signing and software integrity controls for builds and releases. Its format-aware signing covers executables, packages, installers, containers, scripts, manifests, SBOMs, and configuration files. Before trusting a release, it can verify source repositories, branches, build systems, approvals, and CI/CD context. SignPath can produce signed, machine-readable attestations, including SLSA provenance, validation summaries, and signed SBOMs. Listed integrations include plugins and REST API connections for GitHub Actions, GitLab, Jenkins, Azure DevOps, and TeamCity. SignPath says private keys remain in FIPS-compliant hardware security modules and are never exposed or shared. Role-based controls determine who can sign which artifacts and with which certificate. Signing records include the user, file, certificate, policy, and result; reports can be exported, with optional WORM-style log archiving. Deployment options are SaaS, self-hosted, or hybrid. The free Open Source Code Signing plan has eligibility conditions: projects must be actively maintained and released, use an OSI-approved open source license, and have no proprietary components.