Fact0 vs Push Security
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
At a glance
| Dimension | Fact0 | Push Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free tier (30K events/mo) + paid plans | Free tier + paid plans |
| Core Focus | Tamper-evident audit for AI agents | Browser security for AI era |
| Key Feature | Hash-chained ledger with Ed25519 signatures | AiTM phishing & session hijacking detection |
| Integration Style | SDKs (Python, TS, Go) + agent frameworks | Browser extension + SIEM/IdP integrations |
| Best For | Regulated industries (fintech, healthcare) | Security teams combating browser attacks |
| Latest News | v1.2.2 dashboard fixes; Go SDK fix | SANS AI security model; agentic threat hunting |
Fact0 and Push Security serve entirely different needs: Fact0 is a cryptographic audit trail for AI agents, essential for compliance in regulated industries, while Push Security is a browser-based threat detection platform for identity and security teams. Choose Fact0 if you need provable agent logs to pass enterprise security reviews; choose Push Security if you must defend against AiTM phishing, session hijacking, and AI tool data leaks.
Open-source agent audit and replay: hash-chained records, signed exports, self-hosted on your own Docker Compose stack.
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: Fact0 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.
Fact0
28 mentions across 3 sources · 37% positive — critical (averaged across 3 sources)
YouTube, Product Hunt, Bluesky
What users praise
- • Hash-chained ledger with SHA-256 and Ed25519 cryptography provides tamper-evident logs.
- • Supports multiple SDKs (Python, TypeScript, Go) for flexibility.
- • Natively integrates with OpenTelemetry, LangChain, LangGraph, and FastAPI.
- • Generates signed evidence packs (PDF/JSON) and read-only auditor share links.
What frustrates them
- • Zero real user feedback — cannot verify reliability or ease of use.
- • Only 18 Product Hunt upvotes, no organic community buzz anywhere.
- • Off-topic YouTube and Bluesky posts waste scraping effort.
- • No reviews from Reddit, HN, GitHub, or App Store to trust.
Researched Jul 4, 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
- AI startup founder closing enterprise dealsPick: Fact0
Fact0 provides tamper-evident audit logs that satisfy CISO security reviews, with integrations for LangChain and other agent frameworks.
- CISO in regulated industry (fintech/healthcare)Pick: Fact0
Fact0's hash-chained ledger and cryptographic signatures ensure compliance with audit requirements for agent actions.
- Security team defending against phishing and session hijackingPick: Push Security
Push Security detects AiTM, ClickFix, and session hijacking in real time, with automated threat hunting via browser telemetry.
- Identity team hardening MFA and SSO adoptionPick: Push Security
Push Security offers in-browser MFA guardrails and detects ghost logins, helping enforce identity policies without an enterprise browser.
- Security team monitoring AI tool usage and data leaksPick: Push Security
Push Security provides AI tool inventory and in-browser DLP for clipboard and file uploads, preventing data leakage to LLMs.
Frequently Asked Questions
Fact0 vs Push Security: which should you choose?
Fact0 and Push Security serve entirely different needs: Fact0 is a cryptographic audit trail for AI agents, essential for compliance in regulated industries, while Push Security is a browser-based threat detection platform for identity and security teams. Choose Fact0 if you need provable agent logs to pass enterprise security reviews; choose Push Security if you must defend against AiTM phishing, session hijacking, and AI tool data leaks.
Can Fact0 detect phishing attacks?
No, Fact0 is designed for audit logging of AI agents, not for detecting browser-based phishing. Push Security is better for that.
Does Push Security provide tamper-evident logs for AI agents?
No, Push Security focuses on browser security and identity protection, not on cryptographic audit trails for agent actions.
Which tool integrates with LangChain?
Fact0 integrates with LangChain, LangGraph, and other agent frameworks. Push Security does not.
Can either tool be self-hosted?
Neither tool offers a self-hosted free tier. Both are cloud-based, with enterprise options possibly including dedicated instances.
Which tool is better for a startup needing to prove compliance to enterprise buyers?
Fact0, because it provides a verifiable, tamper-evident audit ledger specifically for AI agent actions.
Does Push Security offer an SDK?
No, Push Security is deployed as a browser extension and integrates via APIs with SIEM and identity providers.
What recent updates have these tools had?
Fact0 released v1.2.2 with dashboard UX fixes and Go SDK improvements. Push Security published articles on the SANS AI security model and agentic threat hunting.
Which tool is more affordable for a small team?
Fact0's free tier (30K events/mo) may be sufficient for small-scale agent logs. Push Security's free tier likely covers basic browser threat detection, but advanced features require paid plans.
More Fact0 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 2, 2026