SEALSQ Automotive EV Charging vs Sternum Runtime Protection: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

SEALSQ Automotive EV Charging

Enterprise and mid-market OT security teams protecting EV charging networks should evaluate SEALSQ Automotive EV Charging for its ISO 15118 Plug & Charge compliance and integrated PKI lifecycle management, which eliminates the common gap between charger hardware and identity provisioning that leaves most deployments vulnerable to protocol-level attacks. The vendor's VaultIC secure elements handle both certificate management and firmware updates within the same silicon, addressing the NIST PR.AA and PR.DS functions that most charging operators struggle to implement consistently across distributed charger fleets. Skip this if your EV charging infrastructure is still running legacy non-connected chargers or if you need application-layer visibility beyond the charging protocol itself; SEALSQ focuses narrowly on the authentication and encryption layer, not fleet operations or grid integration.

Sternum Runtime Protection

Mid-market and enterprise teams protecting IoT and embedded devices in operational technology environments should consider Sternum Runtime Protection if zero-day mitigation without patching is your primary constraint. The EIV binary instrumentation approach delivers memory corruption and code injection prevention at 1–3% CPU overhead, which matters when you can't halt production systems for updates, and the agentless firmware integration avoids the deployment friction that kills most IoT security programs. This tool prioritizes attack prevention and forensics over vulnerability management; if your organization needs vulnerability scanning or patch orchestration, you're looking elsewhere.