enclaive Buckypaper CVMs vs PrivateCore vCage: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

enclaive Buckypaper CVMs

Enterprise and mid-market teams handling regulated workloads or processing sensitive data in untrusted cloud environments should pick enclaive Buckypaper CVMs for hardware-enforced isolation that doesn't require rebuilding infrastructure. The 3% CPU overhead is legitimate; most confidential computing approaches tax performance far more heavily, and EU datacenter deployment with ISO 27001 and C5 compliance removes friction for regulated industries. Skip this if your threat model is insider threats alone or you lack the technical depth to manage hardware-backed enclaves; Buckypaper requires operators who understand confidential execution environments, not just VM operators.

PrivateCore vCage

Enterprise and mid-market security teams protecting against supply-chain hardware compromises and advanced persistent threats targeting server memory will find vCage's server integrity attestation and data-in-use encryption harder to replace than detection-only tools. The combination of bootkit prevention, physical access controls, and firmware-level visibility covers NIST PR.PS and GV.SC supply chain risk management in ways that traditional EDR cannot. Not the right fit for organizations without significant on-premises infrastructure or those needing cloud-native workload protection across multiple hypervisors; vCage's strength is securing the foundation layer, not application behavior above it.