HomeToolsPlan StackBest ForCompare
RightAIChoice
CompareBlog
Submit a ToolSign inSign upPlan Your Stack
HomeCompareAlma vs Push Security

Alma vs Push Security

Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings

Live tool data as of 2026-07-06
Reviewed by our team on 2026-07-03
Saved

At a glance

DimensionAlmaPush Security
Pricingfreemium · from Community $0/mofreemium · from Standard $5/user/month (annual) or $6/user/month (monthly)
Best forPlatform and DevOps teams needing to inventory and govern AI agents, Security teams requiring audit trails and least-privilege enforcement for AISecurity teams needing visibility into browser-based attacks (AiTM, ClickFix, OAuth phishing), Identity teams hardening unmanaged identities and enforcing MFA/SSO adoption
Standout featuresPassive discovery of AI agents, sessions, models, and MCP servers · Real-time read/write access map (permitted vs. observed) · Cedar-based RBAC/ABAC policy engine (deny-closed default)Adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) phishing detection and block · ClickFix and ConsentFix attack detection and block · Session hijacking detection and block
Viability score77/10095/100
APIYesYes

Alma is the stronger pick for platform and devops teams needing to inventory and govern ai agents; Push Security fits better for security teams needing visibility into browser-based attacks (aitm, clickfix, oauth phishing).

Built from live tool data, last verified 2026-07-06.

Alma
Alma

Self-hosted open-core control plane for AI agent governance and security.

Visit Website
Push Security
Push Security

Browser security platform that stops AI-powered attacks and controls AI tool usage.

Visit Website
Pricing
Freemium
Freemium
Plans
$0/mo
Not yet published
Not yet published
Contact for pricing
$5/user/month (annual) or $6/user/month (monthly)
Custom
Popularity
0 views
7.5k views
Skill Level
Intermediate
Advanced
API Available
Platforms
CLIAPI
WebPlugin
Categories
🔒 Security & Privacy⚙️ Developer Infrastructure
🔒 Security & Privacy
Features
Passive discovery of AI agents, sessions, models, and MCP servers
Real-time read/write access map (permitted vs. observed)
Cedar-based RBAC/ABAC policy engine (deny-closed default)
Append-only audit ledger with cryptographic hash chaining
Emergency kill switch for agent or model session revocation
FinOps module with per-agent, per-model budget enforcement
Claude Code integration for policy-aware sessions
MCP server governance – discover, register, enforce policy
Identity federation via SAML 2.0 / OIDC with scoped delegation
Compliance evidence module (SOC 2, ISO 27001, NIST)
Evaluation harness for agent behavior vs. policy baselines
Offline license verification (Ed25519) – no phone-home
SLSA Build Level 3 provenance attestation on releases
Cosign keyless signatures via Sigstore (Fulcio + Rekor)
SBOM in CycloneDX and SPDX formats with every release
Adversary-in-the-middle (AiTM) phishing detection and block
ClickFix and ConsentFix attack detection and block
Session hijacking detection and block
Malicious OAuth integration detection and block
Ghost login and shadow SaaS discovery
Credential theft and compromised token detection
Agentic threat hunting using browser telemetry
Real-time AI tool visibility and usage control
In-browser data loss prevention for AI tools (clipboard, file uploads)
In-browser MFA registration and password change guardrails
Malicious browser extension detection and block
Mobile phishing detection via SMS/QR codes
Browser-based incident investigation with session replay
Supports Chrome, Edge, Firefox, Brave, and other Chromium browsers
Browser & Identity Attacks Matrix (51 techniques)
Integrations
Claude Code
pgAudit
eBPF
OpenTelemetry
SAML 2.0
OIDC
PostgreSQL
Sigstore
Fulcio
Rekor
Okta
Azure AD
Google Workspace
Slack
Splunk
Snowflake

Who should pick which

  • Security team facing browser-based attacks
    Pick: Push Security

    Push detects and blocks AiTM, ClickFix, session hijacking, and malicious OAuth – the top browser threats – without changing browsers.

  • Platform team governing AI agents (Claude Code, MCP)
    Pick: Alma

    Alma provides passive discovery, least-privilege access maps, and kill switch for AI agents on self-hosted infrastructure.

  • CISO needing AI tool DLP for employees
    Pick: Push Security

    Push offers in-browser DLP for AI tools (clipboard, file upload) and real-time AI usage control – critical for data leakage prevention.

  • DevOps team with air-gapped environment
    Pick: Alma

    Alma is self-hosted, no phone-home, supports air-gap – ideal for strict data residency or compliance.

  • Identity team hardening unmanaged logins
    Pick: Push Security

    Push provides in-browser MFA registration guardrails and detects ghost logins/shadow SaaS – directly addresses identity attack surface.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, Alma or Push Security?

The best choice between Alma and Push Security depends on your specific use case — we compare them independently on features, current pricing, integrations, and real-world signals (with an on-demand sentiment scan available for each). See the side-by-side breakdown above to match them to your needs.

What are the main differences between Alma and Push Security?

The key differences include pricing model, feature set, platform support, and skill level requirements. Review the full comparison on RightAIChoice for a detailed breakdown.

Is there a free version of Alma or Push Security?

Check the pricing section in the comparison for the latest pricing details on both tools, including free tiers, trial options, and paid plans.

More Alma or Push Security comparisons

Tableau vs Push Security comparison

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 (

Amplitude vs Push Security comparison

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

Looker vs Push Security comparison

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

Power BI vs Push Security comparison

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

Datadog vs Push Security comparison

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

Sentry vs Push Security comparison

Choose Push Security if your primary concern is browser-based attacks (AiTM phishing, OAuth abuse) and securing AI tool usage; it's purpose-built for security and identity teams. Choose Sentry if you'

Explore each tool further

Alma
View Alma reviewAlma alternatives
Push Security
View Push Security reviewPush Security alternatives

Browse these categories

Best AI Security & Privacy toolsBest AI Developer Infrastructure tools
Still deciding? Get the weekly AI tools brief

One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.

RightAIChoice

The decision-making engine for discovering AI tools.

One AI tool every Friday

A 60-second editorial pick. No filler, no funnel — unsubscribe anytime.

Product

  • Browse tools
  • Categories
  • Search
  • Plan my stack
  • Find my AI tool
  • AI chat
  • Compare
  • Submit your tool

Resources

  • Best AI guides
  • Stacks
  • Blog
  • Methodology
  • Viability scoring

Company

  • About
  • Team
  • Press & brand kit
  • Contact

Your account

  • Dashboard
  • Saved tools
  • Settings
  • Sign in
  • Create account

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Affiliate disclosure
  • Unsubscribe

© 2026 RightAIChoice. All rights reserved.

Built for the AI community.