kms.network

← All comparisons

Infisical vs Google Cloud KMS

How Infisical and Google Cloud KMS differ on scope, key custody, deployment and cost.

InfisicalGoogle Cloud KMS
TypeOSS secretsCloud KMS
ScopeApp secrets, PKI, SSHEncryption keys
DeploymentSaaS + self-hostedSaaS (GCP)
Key custodyKMS module; HSM support in paid tiersHSM tier FIPS 140-2 Level 3; External Key Manager for off-cloud keys
How it worksStarts where most teams actually hurt: .env files in Slack. Syncs secrets into CI, Kubernetes and cloud platforms, with dynamic secrets and rotation in paid tiers, and an internal CA alongside. Self-host the same code you would rent.Key rings and key versions with explicit rotation, offered in software, HSM and external tiers. External Key Manager is the differentiator: the key stays in your own system and Google calls out to it, so the cloud can be denied access by design rather than by policy.
Pricing*Free (5 identities); Pro $20/identity/moMetered per key version + operations
Free tierYesNo
LicenceMIT (core)—
Best forTeams escaping .env filesGCP workloads and hold-your-own-key rules

Infisical

  • Genuinely quick to adopt — hours, not a quarter
  • Open-source core you can self-host
  • Over a hundred integrations for syncing
  • Less proven at very large scale than Vault
  • Per-identity pricing adds up on big teams

Google Cloud KMS

  • Clear key ring and version model
  • External Key Manager is a genuine sovereignty answer
  • Consistent API across software and HSM tiers
  • No free tier
  • External keys add latency and a hard dependency

Bottom line

Choose Infisical for teams escaping .env files. Choose Google Cloud KMS for gcp workloads and hold-your-own-key rules.

* Published list pricing (vendor pricing pages, August 2026).