Casdoor vs Push Security
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
At a glance
| Dimension | Casdoor | Push Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free (open-source, self-hosted) | Freemium (cloud, paid tiers for advanced features) |
| Deployment | Self-hosted or cloud | Cloud-based, browser extension |
| Primary Focus | Identity and access management (SSO, MFA, AI agent auth) | Browser security (AiTM, session hijacking, AI data leakage) |
| AI/Agent Capabilities | Built-in MCP server for AI agent auth, per-tool permissions, agent-to-agent auth | Agentic threat hunting, AI tool usage control, DLP for LLMs |
| Integrations | Google Workspace, Azure AD, MCP, Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, VS Code, GitHub Copilot, OpenClaw | Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, Slack, Splunk, Snowflake |
| Target User | Enterprises adopting AI agents, SaaS platform builders, developers | Security teams, Identity teams, SOCs |
If your immediate need is preventing browser-based attacks (AiTM, session hijacking) and controlling AI tool data leakage, Push Security is the more specialized, agentic solution. If you are an enterprise building AI-agent workflows and need an open-source IAM with native MCP support and agent authentication, Casdoor is the stronger, extensible platform. Choose based on whether your priority is browser threat defense or identity management for AI agents.
Open-source IAM and SSO platform with a built-in MCP server for AI agent identity and access management.
Visit Website
Push Security is browser security for the AI era — it stops AiTM phishing, ClickFix attacks, session hijacking and shadow AI inside the
Visit WebsiteWhat real users say: Casdoor 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.
Casdoor
23 mentions across 4 sources · 50% positive — mixed (averaged across 4 sources)
Hacker News, YouTube, GitHub, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Built-in MCP server enables AI agents to manage identity via natural language, a unique feature.
- • Fine-grained, scope-based authorization per tool call for AI agents.
- • Agent-to-agent authentication with OAuth 2.1 and Dynamic Client Registration.
- • Supports 100+ identity providers and protocols like OAuth, OIDC, SAML, LDAP.
What frustrates them
- • Community data shows limited real-world feedback; most discussions are about competitors.
- • A security advisory lists multiple authentication bypass vulnerabilities, a major concern.
- • Competes with more established tools like Keycloak and Authentik that have larger communities.
- • The agent-first focus may be overkill for traditional IAM use cases.
Researched Aug 12, 2026
Push Security
30 mentions across 3 sources · 51% positive — mixed (weighted across 3 sources)
Hacker News, YouTube, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Browser-extension delivery means no endpoint agent and no forced enterprise-browser migration
- • Cross-browser coverage including Chromebooks and AI/enterprise browsers
- • Published $5/user/month Standard pricing with self-serve trial lowers evaluation friction
- • Detections target modern browser-layer threats: AiTM, ClickFix, BitB, device-code phishing
What frustrates them
- • Essentially no independent user reviews anywhere in the scraped community data
- • Extension-based security is itself a supply-chain risk that HN commenters flag
- • Clipboard, prompt and file-upload monitoring raises privacy and data-residency objections
- • Autonomous agent deployment of blocks may conflict with change-control processes
Researched Oct 14, 2026
Who should pick which
- Security Operations Center (SOC) analystPick: Push Security
Push provides real-time browser telemetry and agentic threat hunting for AiTM, session hijacking, and AI data leakage, which are direct SOC concerns.
- Enterprise architect building AI agent workflowsPick: Casdoor
Casdoor's native MCP server and OAuth 2.1 support enable secure authentication and authorization for AI agents, including per-tool permissions and agent-to-agent auth.
- Identity team enforcing MFA/SSOPick: Push Security
Push's in-browser MFA registration and password change guardrails help harden unmanaged identities without forcing a browser change.
- SaaS platform builder with integrated billingPick: Casdoor
Casdoor includes SaaS management with plans, pricing tiers, and payment providers, reducing the need for separate billing infrastructure.
- Organizations needing open-source IAMPick: Casdoor
Casdoor is fully open source and free, with no vendor lock-in, and now recognized in the CNCF landscape.
Frequently Asked Questions
Casdoor vs Push Security: which should you choose?
If your immediate need is preventing browser-based attacks (AiTM, session hijacking) and controlling AI tool data leakage, Push Security is the more specialized, agentic solution. If you are an enterprise building AI-agent workflows and need an open-source IAM with native MCP support and agent authentication, Casdoor is the stronger, extensible platform. Choose based on whether your priority is browser threat defense or identity management for AI agents.
Can Push Security be self-hosted?
No, Push Security is cloud-based only.
Does Casdoor provide browser-level threat detection?
No, Casdoor focuses on identity and access management, not browser security or AI attack detection.
Which tool better controls AI tool data leakage?
Push Security offers in-browser DLP for AI tools (clipboard, file uploads) and real-time AI tool visibility, making it stronger for this use case.
Can I use Casdoor for AI agent authentication?
Yes, Casdoor has a built-in MCP server and supports OAuth 2.1 for AI agents, including per-tool permissions and agent-to-agent authentication.
Does Push Security integrate with MCP?
No, Push Security's news does not mention MCP integration; it focuses on browser telemetry and AI agent threat hunting.
Which tool is more cost-effective?
Casdoor is completely free and open-source; Push Security has a freemium model with paid tiers. For zero-budget IAM, Casdoor is better.
Which tool is better for SaaS with billing?
Casdoor includes built-in SaaS management with plans, pricing tiers, and payment providers, making it suitable for SaaS platforms.
Does Push Security support SSO?
Yes, it integrates with Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, and provides in-browser MFA/SSO guardrails, but it is not a full IAM.
More Casdoor or Push Security comparisons
These are not competitors, and you should not shortlist them against each other. Push Security answers a security question — how do you stop browser-based phishing (AiTM, ClickFix, device code, consen
These two don't compete for the same budget, so there's no either/or decision here. Buy Push Security if you're a security or identity team watching AiTM phishing, ClickFix, device-code phishing, and
These two are not competitors and shouldn't be evaluated head-to-head — they solve different problems for different budget owners. If your problem is browser-borne attacks (AiTM reverse proxies, Click
These are not substitutes — they're different layers of a security/ops stack. Buy Datadog if your problem is observability, cloud posture, or AI-workload monitoring across multi-cloud infrastructure;
These are not competitors, so there is no 'either/or' decision here — shortlisting both in one evaluation would be a category mistake. If your problem is browser-delivered credential theft, AiTM rever
There is no buying decision here. Push Security protects browsers from AiTM, ClickFix, device code and consent phishing and gives security teams visibility into shadow AI usage at roughly $5/user/mont
Explore each tool further
Browse these categories
One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.
Last reviewed: July 3, 2026