Flyto Core vs Push Security
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
At a glance
| Dimension | Flyto Core | Push Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Freemium (open-source CE self-hosted free, Enterprise paid) | Freemium (paid tiers undisclosed) |
| Deployment | Self-hosted (CE) or managed (Enterprise) | Cloud-based (browser extension + telemetry) |
| Core Focus | Security validation: deterministic automation & evidence-backed attack paths | Browser security: detect/block AI-powered attacks & data loss |
| Key Feature | 250+ modules, replayable evidence, CTEM scoring | Real-time AI tool control, AiTM phishing block, agentic threat hunting |
| Best For | Red teams & CTEM programs needing automated validation | Security teams securing browser-based attacks & AI tool use |
| Latest News | No recent news (likely stable) | 2026-06: Poisoned tenant attack experience, AI security maturity model, agentic threat hunting pipeline |
If your priority is defending against browser-based AI attacks (AiTM, ClickFix, data leakage to LLMs) with real-time controls and agentic hunting, Push Security wins. If you need a self-hosted, open-source automation engine to validate attack paths from existing scanners with replayable evidence, Flyto Core is the choice. Both are freemium, but serve different security postures.
Open-core visual workflow and MCP automation with deterministic browser execution, evidence, and replay — plus a CTEM security validation layer.
Visit Website
Browser-native security that blocks AI-driven phishing and secures AI app usage in the browser.
Visit WebsiteWhat real users say: Flyto Core 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.
Flyto Core
2 mentions across 1 sources · 45% positive — mixed (averaged across 1 source)
Hacker News
What users praise
- • Open-core model with self-hosted CE is genuinely free
- • 412 modules cover browser, AI, cloud, and data tasks
- • Replayable evidence capture ideal for audit trails
- • BYO philosophy integrates existing tools without lock-in
What frustrates them
- • YAML becomes messy for complex logic and branching
- • Very early adoption—few real-world case studies exist
- • Module quality and maintenance are unclear
- • Enterprise pricing for SSO and runner fleets feels steep
Researched Jul 3, 2026
Push Security
30 mentions across 3 sources · 30% positive — critical (weighted across 3 sources)
Hacker News, YouTube, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Addresses emerging threats: AI-driven phishing, ClickFix, device code phishing.
- • Works across all major browsers without migrating users.
- • Includes shadow AI app discovery and control for unsanctioned tools.
- • Blocks malicious OAuth consents and session hijacking in real time.
What frustrates them
- • Virtually no independent user feedback or case studies available.
- • Potential browser performance overhead due to constant monitoring.
- • May cause friction with false positives blocking legitimate apps.
- • Advanced features require security expertise to configure properly.
Researched Sep 8, 2026
Who should pick which
- Security team defending against browser-based AI attacksPick: Push Security
Push provides real-time AiTM phishing, ClickFix blocking, and AI tool data loss prevention — directly addressing AI-era threats.
- Red team needing deterministic, replayable automationPick: Flyto Core
Flyto Core's 250+ modules and evidence capture enable repeatable, auditable attack simulations.
- CTEM program leadPick: Flyto Core
Flyto Core's attack path validation and CTEM scoring from imported findings fit continuous threat exposure management.
- Identity team hardening unmanaged identitiesPick: Push Security
Push's in-browser MFA/SSO guardrails and ghost login detection address identity threats.
- Developer building custom security workflowsPick: Flyto Core
Flyto Core's YAML recipes and BYO integrations allow custom automation without SaaS dependency.
Frequently Asked Questions
Flyto Core vs Push Security: which should you choose?
If your priority is defending against browser-based AI attacks (AiTM, ClickFix, data leakage to LLMs) with real-time controls and agentic hunting, Push Security wins. If you need a self-hosted, open-source automation engine to validate attack paths from existing scanners with replayable evidence, Flyto Core is the choice. Both are freemium, but serve different security postures.
Which tool is better for blocking phishing attacks?
Push Security is designed to detect and block AiTM, ClickFix, and ConsentFix phishing in real time using browser telemetry.
Can Flyto Core replace my existing vulnerability scanner?
No, it complements scanners by validating findings and creating attack paths with evidence, not replacing them.
Is Push Security available as a self-hosted solution?
No, it is cloud-based via a browser extension, suitable for environments that allow browser extension deployment.
Does Flyto Core support AI security modules?
Yes, included in its 250+ modules across browser, data, files, cloud, AI, and notifications.
Which tool is easier to set up?
Push Security requires browser extension installation; Flyto Core CE requires self-hosting with DevOps skills.
Can I use both tools together?
Yes, they address different layers: browser security vs. validation automation.
What is the latest news for Flyto Core?
No recent news; the project appears stable without major updates.
Does Push Security integrate with SIEM tools?
Yes, integrates with Splunk and Snowflake for telemetry export.
More Flyto Core 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
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
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 (
Explore each tool further
Browse these categories
One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.
Last reviewed: July 3, 2026