SniffCat vs VulDB

Same instrument, two spec sheets — measured, not claimed.

Uptime · 30d
Uptime · 90d83.3%100%
Uptime · 30d83.3%100%
P50 · ms290360
P95 · ms5981138
AuthapiKeyapiKey
CORSnoyes
HTTPSyesyes
Card requirednono
Commercial useyesunclear
Data licenseUnverified
Free tierFree tier — key may be required
Rate limitRetry-After: 24sUnpublished
In directory since2026-08-192026-07-05
operationalpartialdownno data

SniffCat vs VulDB: common questions

Which is more reliable, SniffCat or VulDB?

On our scheduled checks, VulDB leads on measured uptime — SniffCat at 83.3% versus VulDB at 100% over 90 days. These are our own probe results, not provider claims; the uptime bars above show the day-by-day record for both.

Which is faster, SniffCat or VulDB?

SniffCat has the lower median latency in our checks — SniffCat responds in 290 ms versus VulDB at 360 ms (P50). Tail latency (P95) is in the table above; for most workloads the median is the number that shapes how the API feels.

Do SniffCat and VulDB need an API key?

Both ask you to authenticate — SniffCat uses an API key and VulDB uses an API key. Each key is free to obtain; the Auth and Card-required rows above spell out the signup terms.

Can I call SniffCat and VulDB from the browser?

Only VulDB is browser-friendly — it returns CORS headers over HTTPS. SniffCat needs a server-side call or proxy, so factor that into which one fits a front-end project.

Are SniffCat and VulDB free for commercial use?

SniffCat allows commercial use on its free tier, and VulDB has unclear commercial terms. We track service terms and the data license as separate fields — see the Commercial use and Data license rows above, and confirm both before shipping either in a paid product.