Exogram vs Push Security
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
At a glance
| Dimension | Exogram | Push Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Freemium (open-core) + Enterprise pricing | Free (limited) + paid tiers not specified |
| Primary Focus | Deterministic governance for AI agent tool execution | Browser-based attack detection and AI tool usage control |
| Key Differentiator | Cryptographic audit trails + 0.07ms per evaluation | Browser telemetry + agentic threat hunting |
| Deployment | Open-core runtime (self-hosted or cloud) | Cloud-based browser extension |
| Ideal For | Developers governing AI agent actions | Security teams securing browser and AI usage |
| Latest News | 2026-06-16: Guardrail DoS problem paper; v3.2.0 released | 2026-06-24: SANS AI security maturity model discussion |
Choose Push Security if your priority is securing browser-based attacks and monitoring AI tool usage among employees; it excels at detecting AiTM phishing and shadow SaaS. Choose Exogram if you need cryptographic, deterministic governance for AI agent tool calls in production—its audit trail and low overhead are unmatched. For most teams, the choice boils down to whether you’re protecting human browser activity or governing autonomous agent execution.
Deterministic AI agent governance runtime that blocks unsafe tool calls in 0.07ms.
Visit Website
Browser-native security that stops AI-driven attacks and secures employee AI usage
Visit WebsiteWhat real users say: Exogram 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.
Exogram
4 mentions across 1 sources · 65% positive
Hacker News
What users praise
- • Ultra-fast deterministic tool-call evaluation at 0.07ms per decision.
- • Cryptographic audit trail (SHA-256 hash-linked, append-only) ensures tamper-proof logging.
- • Open-core with AGPL license allows full code inspection and modification.
- • Separates probabilistic reasoning from deterministic enforcement, removing LLM from the decision path.
What frustrates them
- • Extremely early-stage with little real-world deployment proof.
- • No independent third-party reviews or benchmarks available.
- • Enterprise features and pricing are opaque.
- • Limited integration ecosystem beyond LangChain, AutoGen, and CrewAI.
Researched Jul 3, 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 team at a mid-size companyPick: Push Security
Push provides browser-based visibility and blocking of AiTM phishing, session hijacking, and malicious OAuth, plus AI tool usage controls—all without forcing a browser switch.
- DevOps team deploying AI agents in productionPick: Exogram
Exogram’s deterministic, cryptographic audit trail and 0.07ms evaluation overhead ensure every tool call is governed and provable, critical for compliance and safety.
- Compliance officer at a FinTechPick: Exogram
Exogram’s SHA-256 linked audit chain and SOC 2/EU AI Act readiness meet strict regulatory requirements for agent actions.
- IT team reducing shadow SaaSPick: Push Security
Push detects ghost logins and shadow SaaS via browser telemetry, helping IT discover and control unmanaged app usage.
- AI startup using multi-agent frameworksPick: Exogram
Exogram integrates directly with LangChain, AutoGen, and CrewAI to add governance without modifying agent code.
Frequently Asked Questions
Exogram vs Push Security: which should you choose?
Choose Push Security if your priority is securing browser-based attacks and monitoring AI tool usage among employees; it excels at detecting AiTM phishing and shadow SaaS. Choose Exogram if you need cryptographic, deterministic governance for AI agent tool calls in production—its audit trail and low overhead are unmatched. For most teams, the choice boils down to whether you’re protecting human browser activity or governing autonomous agent execution.
How do Push Security and Exogram differ in primary purpose?
Push Security focuses on browser-based attack detection (e.g., AiTM phishing) and AI tool usage control for human users. Exogram governs AI agent tool execution deterministically, providing cryptographic audit trails.
Which tool is better for compliance with regulations like SOC 2 or EU AI Act?
Exogram is explicitly designed for compliance with SOC 2 and EU AI Act, offering SHA-256 linked audit chains. Push Security supports identity hardening but does not mention compliance-specific audit trails.
Can Push Security govern AI agents?
Push Security controls human use of AI tools (e.g., clipboard data leakage) but does not govern autonomous AI agent actions. Exogram is purpose-built for that.
Does Exogram protect against browser-based attacks like session hijacking?
No, Exogram focuses on governing AI agent actions, not browser security for humans. Push Security addresses those attacks directly.
What integrations does each support?
Push integrates with Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, Slack, Splunk, Snowflake. Exogram integrates with LangChain, AutoGen, CrewAI, Pydantic AI, ChatGPT, MCP, REST API, AWS, Discord, GitHub.
Is either tool open source?
Exogram is described as 'open-core' meaning core features are open source, with enterprise add-ons. Push Security's distribution model is not explicitly stated but appears proprietary with freemium tiers.
What is the performance overhead of each?
Push Security’s browser extension incurs minimal overhead typical of browser agents. Exogram claims 0.07ms per evaluation, making it suitable for latency-sensitive agent chains.
Which tools' latest news is most relevant for current buyer decisions?
Exogram’s v3.2.0 (2026-06-09) adds knowledge graph and behavioral engine, enhancing trust visualization. Push’s latest (2026-06-24) discusses AI security maturity models, useful for strategic planning.
More Exogram 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 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
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 (
Explore each tool further
Browse these categories
One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.
Last reviewed: July 2, 2026