Sirr vs HashiCorp Vault
Vault is infrastructure secret management for enterprises — dynamic credentials, PKI, Kubernetes auth. Genuinely excellent at what it does. Sirr is purpose-built for ephemeral secret delivery: credentials that self-destruct after use.
When to use HashiCorp Vault
Vault is the right tool when you need long-lived infrastructure secret management. It excels at problems Sirr does not attempt to solve:
- Dynamic database credentials — Vault generates short-lived DB credentials on demand. Sirr does not manage database access.
- PKI and certificate management — Vault can act as a certificate authority, issuing and revoking TLS certificates at scale.
- Identity brokering — Vault integrates with OIDC, LDAP, SAML, and Kubernetes to broker identity across systems.
- Automated secret rotation — Vault rotates secrets on a schedule. Sirr's model is destruction, not rotation.
When to use Sirr
Sirr fills the gap Vault doesn't cover: ephemeral developer credentials and AI agent workflows.
- Ephemeral secret sharing — Passwords, API keys, and tokens that should disappear after being read. Vault preserves secrets. Sirr destroys them.
- AI agent workflows — Built-in MCP server for just-in-time secret delivery to AI agents. No standing access, no broad policy scope. Vault has no MCP integration or read-count enforcement.
- Zero-ops deployment — Vault requires a cluster, unseal keys, and HCL policies. Sirr requires docker run.
- Burn-after-read — Every Sirr secret can be limited by read count, TTL, or both. Vault has no read-count enforcement or burn-after-read mechanism.
- Budget-conscious teams — Sirr starts free and scales to $499/yr for unlimited principals. Vault Enterprise starts at ~$50K/year, and HCP runs ~$360/month.
Side-by-side comparison
| Feature | Sirr | Vault |
|---|---|---|
| Ephemeral by default | ||
| Burn after N reads | ||
| AI / MCP integration | ||
| Single binary, zero ops | ||
| Self-hosted cost | $499/yr (Team) | ~$4,320/yr (HCP) or $50K+ (Enterprise) |
| Dynamic DB credentials | ||
| PKI / Certificate authority | ||
| Identity brokering (OIDC, LDAP) | ||
| Automated secret rotation | N/A (ephemeral) | |
| K8s auth method |
The bottom line
Different problems. Different tools. Vault's model is preservation — keep secrets safe, rotate them, control access with policies. Sirr's model is destruction — secrets exist only long enough to be delivered, then they're gone. Many teams use both: Vault for infrastructure secrets that need to persist, and Sirr as the secure delivery channel for credentials that should self-destruct.