Adrian vs Push Security
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
At a glance
| Dimension | Adrian | Push Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Freemium (open-source, self-hosted) | Freemium (cloud-based) |
| Primary Focus | Runtime security monitoring for autonomous AI agents | Browser security for human employees against AI-powered attacks and unauthorized AI tool usage |
| Deployment | Self-hosted open-source, integrated via API | Cloud-based, via browser extension/agent |
| Key Integrations | Agent frameworks, Splunk, Sentinel, Discord, GitHub, YouTube, MCP | Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, Slack, Splunk, Snowflake |
| Latest News | 2026-06-29: Avo 4 release after 2000 commits | 2026-06-26: Experienced poisoned tenant attack, shared lessons; 2026-05-12: Built agentic threat hunting pipeline with AI agents |
| Best For | Teams deploying autonomous AI agents in production requiring real-time chain-of-thought monitoring | Security teams needing browser-based attack visibility and AI tool governance for employees |
Choose Push Security if your priority is securing employee browser usage against AI-powered phishing, session hijacking, and data leakage to AI tools. Choose Adrian if you're building autonomous AI agents and need runtime monitoring of their chain-of-thought to catch prompt injection or policy drift. They solve different problems: human security vs. agent security.
Browser-native security that stops AI-driven attacks and secures employee AI usage
Visit WebsiteWhat real users say: Adrian vs Push Security
Not marketing copy and not our opinion — a structured sweep of public discussion (reviews, forums, communities and video comments), showing what people praise and what they complain about for each tool.
Adrian
75 mentions across 6 sources · 16% positive — critical
Hacker News, Product Hunt, Bluesky, Stack Overflow, GitHub, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Monitors actual chain-of-thought, not just inputs/outputs of agents.
- • Open-source codebase allows full audit and customization.
- • Blocks prompt injection and policy drift before execution.
- • Supports human-in-the-loop approval for risky actions.
What frustrates them
- • Fail-open on errors makes it unreliable for security.
- • Sync tool execution bypasses BLOCK/HITL entirely.
- • Dashboard filter mismatch hinders investigation.
- • Very small community limits third-party validation.
Researched Jul 6, 2026
Push Security
30 mentions across 3 sources · 43% positive — mixed
Hacker News, YouTube, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Works as a lightweight extension across all major browsers without forcing a single proprietary browser.
- • Detects advanced threats like AiTM phishing, ClickFix, session hijacking, and malicious OAuth flows.
- • Autonomous hunting agents analyze browser telemetry to write and deploy detection rules at machine speed.
- • Provides comprehensive AI usage governance: inventory, prompt monitoring, file upload blocking, and unsanctioned app control.
What frustrates them
- • No independent community feedback or real-user reviews available to verify claims.
- • Requires advanced security expertise to configure and interpret telemetry effectively.
- • High-fidelity telemetry collection may trigger privacy and compliance red flags.
- • Potential for false positives in blocking legitimate OAuth and extension actions.
Researched Aug 26, 2026
Who should pick which
- Security operations manager at a large enterprisePick: Push Security
Push Security provides browser-based phishing and session hijacking detection, plus AI tool governance, which directly addresses top security concerns for employee endpoints.
- ML engineer deploying autonomous AI agentsPick: Adrian
Adrian offers real-time chain-of-thought monitoring and prompt injection blocking, essential for safe agent deployment in production.
- Compliance officer overseeing AI regulationsPick: Push Security
Push Security includes AI tool visibility and usage control, helping meet US/EU/UK AI compliance requirements as noted in their news.
- Startup building multi-agent swarmsPick: Adrian
Adrian's low-overhead, open-source design fits cost-sensitive environments needing runtime security for experimental agent systems.
- IT admin hardening identity and MFA adoptionPick: Push Security
Push Security includes in-browser MFA registration guardrails and ghost login discovery, aiding identity security without full MFA rollout.
Frequently Asked Questions
Adrian vs Push Security: which should you choose?
Choose Push Security if your priority is securing employee browser usage against AI-powered phishing, session hijacking, and data leakage to AI tools. Choose Adrian if you're building autonomous AI agents and need runtime monitoring of their chain-of-thought to catch prompt injection or policy drift. They solve different problems: human security vs. agent security.
Can Push Security detect attacks on mobile devices?
Yes, it includes mobile phishing detection via SMS/QR codes.
Does Adrian require a cloud subscription?
No, Adrian is self-hosted open-source. You deploy and manage it yourself.
Which tool prevents data leakage to ChatGPT?
Push Security has in-browser DLP for AI tools (clipboard, file uploads) and can block unauthorized AI tool usage.
Is Adrian suitable for simple chatbots?
No, Adrian is designed for autonomous AI agents, not deterministic chatbots.
Can Push Security replace endpoint DLP?
No, it only covers browser data loss; full endpoint DLP is outside its scope.
Does Adrian integrate with LangChain?
Yes, it integrates with agent frameworks like LangChain via API.
What's the latest version of Adrian?
As of 2026-06-29, Avo 4 has been released with 2000 commits of updates.
Does Push Security require a custom browser?
No, it works with Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Brave, and other browsers without migration.
More Adrian or Push Security comparisons
Push Security and Looker address entirely different domains — browser security vs. business intelligence — so the choice depends on your primary need. If your priority is stopping browser-based attack
Buyers should not choose between Push Security and Amplitude — they serve entirely different needs. Push Security is for security teams defending against browser-based attacks and securing AI usage. A
If your priority is securing browser-based attacks and shadow AI usage, choose Push Security — it directly addresses AiTM phishing, AI tool data leakage, and ghost logins across all browsers. If you n
Choose Datadog if you need deep, unified observability across infrastructure, apps, and security for DevOps/SRE teams. Choose Push Security if your priority is stopping browser-based attacks (AiTM phi
Push Security and Tableau serve fundamentally different purposes, so the choice depends entirely on your need: browser security and AI governance (Push Security) vs. data visualization and analytics (
Push Security and Power BI serve fundamentally different needs: Push Security is a browser security platform for stopping AI-powered attacks and controlling AI tool usage, while Power BI is a business
Explore each tool further
Browse these categories
One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.
Last reviewed: July 6, 2026