Axiom Refract vs. Dependency Scanners
Package vulnerabilities are not architectural vulnerabilities
Dependency scanners like Snyk, Dependabot, and OWASP Dependency-Check identify known vulnerabilities in third-party packages. They are essential for supply chain security but operate only on external dependencies, not on the internal architectural structure of the codebase itself.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Axiom Refract | Axiom Refract vs. Dependency Scanners |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture Governance | ✓ | — |
| SPOF Detection | ✓ | — |
| Blast Radius Analysis | ✓ | — |
| Dead Code Detection | ✓ | — |
| Dependency Mapping | ✓ | ✓ |
| Compliance Mapping | ✓ | ✓ |
| MCP/AI Agent Integration | ✓ | — |
| Multi-Language (145+) | ✓ | — |
| C4 Diagram Generation | ✓ | — |
| Supply Chain Audit | ✓ | ✓ |
Where This Approach Falls Short
- Dependency scanners map external packages only — they cannot see internal code coupling or structural dependencies
- No architectural visualization, SPOF detection, or centrality analysis
- Vulnerability reports are security artifacts, not architectural governance records
What Axiom Refract Does Differently
Internal + External
Axiom maps both internal code dependencies and external package dependencies. Dependency scanners see only the external layer.
Structural Risk
A dependency scanner tells you a package has a CVE. Axiom tells you which files use that package, how central those files are, and what breaks if you update it.
Architectural Context
Axiom places dependency findings within the full structural graph. Dependency scanners report vulnerabilities in isolation from architecture.
Who Should Consider Axiom Refract
Teams running dependency scanners that want to understand the architectural impact of their supply chain findings, not just the CVE count.
See it in action.
Upload your repository and get a complete architectural record. No credit card required.