Greywall vs Push Security

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

Analysis reviewed Live tool data as of 2026-10-18
Cross-checked through our multi-step verification ·
Saved

At a glance

DimensionGreywallPush Security
PricingFree (open source available)Freemium (paid tiers undisclosed)
Primary Use CaseSandbox for AI coding agents to prevent data leaksEnterprise browser security against AiTM/ClickFix/OAuth attacks
DeploymentLocal kernel-enforced sandbox (macOS/Linux CLI)Cloud-based browser extension (multi-browser)
Key FeatureLive activity feed with watch/ask/deny modesAgentic threat hunting with browser telemetry
Target UserDevelopers using AI coding agentsSecurity & identity teams
Latest NewsNo recent news2026-06-26: Experienced poisoned tenant attack; highlighted browser security gap

Choose Push Security if you need enterprise-grade browser security against sophisticated attacks like AiTM phishing and OAuth abuse, especially in AI tool governance. Choose Greywall if you're a developer wanting lightweight, kernel-level sandboxing for AI coding agents to prevent accidental data leaks. They solve different problems: Push protects users from external threats; Greywall protects secrets from internal agents.

Try GreywallTry Push Security
Greywall
Greywall

Greywall sandboxes any local CLI coding agent with a live activity feed of every file read, write, and outbound connection.

Visit Website
Push Security
Push Security

Push Security is browser security for the AI era — it stops AiTM phishing, ClickFix attacks, session hijacking and shadow AI inside the

Visit Website
Pricing
Freemium
Freemium
Plans
$0
Talk to us
$5/user/month
Custom
Popularity
5 views
7.5k views
Skill Level
Intermediate
Advanced
API Available
Platforms
CLI
Web
Categories
🧠 Agent Memory & Runtimes🔐 Application & Code Security
🚨 Threat Detection & SOC🔒 Security & Privacy
Features
Live activity feed logs every file read, write, and outbound connection in real time
Kernel-enforced filesystem sandboxing with per-path read/write/deny rules
Network isolation via TUN + SOCKS5 proxy captures TCP/UDP traffic including binaries that ignore proxy env vars
Seccomp BPF syscall filtering blocks dangerous system calls like ptrace, mount, kexec, and module loading
eBPF monitoring traces syscall exits with process, path, and reason context
Landlock filesystem control enforces read/write permissions below userspace on Linux 5.13+
Bubblewrap namespaces isolate process, network, and mount environments on Linux 3.8+
Switch between allow, ask, and deny mode mid-session without restarting the agent
Deny rules for filesystem paths, network hosts, and commands
Command blocking applies inside pipes, chains, and nested shells
Learning mode auto-generates least-privilege templates via strace
Safe defaults deny .env, SSH keys, git hooks, and shell configs
One-line install via Homebrew, curl, Go install, or build from source
Works with any local CLI agent with no agent-specific configuration
Linux and macOS support with graceful degradation on older kernels
Real-time AiTM reverse-proxy phishing detection and blocking in the browser
Cloned login page, Browser-in-the-Browser and Browser-in-the-Middle detection
ClickFix clipboard injection blocking at the point of interaction
Device code phishing detection that catches token theft bypassing MFA and passkeys
OAuth consent monitoring, consent blocking and app removal
Session hijacking and credential attack detection
Malicious browser extension detection, risk scoring and default-deny allowlisting
Extension supply chain change monitoring for ownership transfers and permission escalations
Shadow AI app discovery and agentic browser detection for Comet, Atlas and Dia
AI prompt and data-input monitoring with AI clipboard monitoring and blocking
AI file upload monitoring plus AI OAuth and agent permission monitoring
AI usage policy enforcement that blocks unsanctioned tools
Autonomous threat hunting agents that write detection rules and deploy blocks
Configurable response modes per control: monitor, warn or block
Browser DLP with file download, upload and clipboard telemetry and blocking
Integrations
Proofpoint
Okta
Google Workspace
Microsoft 365
Microsoft Teams
Microsoft Sentinel
Datadog
Splunk
SentinelOne
Slack

What real users say: Greywall 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.

Greywall

17 mentions across 2 sources · 78% positive (averaged across 2 sources)

Hacker News, GitHub

What users praise

  • • Kernel-level sandboxing provides stronger isolation than container or VM approaches.
  • • Deny-by-default policy prevents agents from accessing sensitive files like .env and SSH keys.
  • • Live activity feed shows every read, write, and network request in real time.
  • • Supports any CLI agent without modifications, including Claude Code, Codex, and Cursor.

What frustrates them

  • • Very early-stage with only ~250 GitHub stars and 22 open issues.
  • • A user reported it could be forkbombed by a compromised package, raising reliability doubts.
  • • Limited community presence outside Hacker News and GitHub makes support uncertain.
  • • No official documentation or tutorials beyond the GitHub repo and website.

Researched Jul 3, 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 analyst
    Pick: Push Security

    Push's browser telemetry and agentic threat hunting detect AiTM, ClickFix, and OAuth attacks that bypass EDR. Integrations with Splunk/Slack enable SOAR workflows.

  • Identity & access manager
    Pick: Push Security

    Push enforces MFA registration and password changes in-browser, detects ghost logins and shadow SaaS, reducing identity attack surface.

  • AI governance lead
    Pick: Push Security

    Push provides real-time AI tool inventory, usage controls (clipboard, file uploads, OAuth), and compliance evidence for AI regulations.

  • Developer using AI coding agents
    Pick: Greywall

    Greywall sandboxes agents like Claude Code and Codex to prevent them from reading .env files, API keys, or making unauthorized network calls, with zero config per agent.

  • Platform engineer evaluating agent security
    Pick: Greywall

    Greywall's kernel-enforced isolation with deny-by-default and learning mode offers lightweight, agent-agnostic sandboxing without VMs or containers.

Frequently Asked Questions

Greywall vs Push Security: which should you choose?

Choose Push Security if you need enterprise-grade browser security against sophisticated attacks like AiTM phishing and OAuth abuse, especially in AI tool governance. Choose Greywall if you're a developer wanting lightweight, kernel-level sandboxing for AI coding agents to prevent accidental data leaks. They solve different problems: Push protects users from external threats; Greywall protects secrets from internal agents.

Does Push Security replace an enterprise browser?

No, it works across all major browsers via extension, detecting attacks without migration.

Can Greywall block outbound network calls?

Yes, via TUN + SOCKS5 proxy with allow/deny rules, and a denial watchdog.

Does Push detect clipboard data loss to AI tools?

Yes, it has in-browser DLP for AI tools monitoring clipboard and file uploads.

Which agents does Greywall support?

Any CLI agent: Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Aider, Goose, Amp, Gemini CLI, Cline, OpenCode, Copilot, and more.

Is Push Security suitable for small businesses?

Not ideal; it targets enterprises with browser-based attack surface and AI usage.

Does Greywall require agent-specific configuration?

No; it sits transparently under any agent process without agent-specific config.

Can Push Security prevent session hijacking?

Yes, it detects and blocks session hijacking attacks using browser telemetry.

Does Greywall work on Windows?

No, only macOS and Linux are supported.

More Greywall or Push Security comparisons

Amplitude vs Push Security comparison

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

Sentry vs Push Security comparison

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

Looker vs Push Security comparison

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

Datadog vs Push Security comparison

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;

Power BI vs Push Security comparison

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

Tableau vs Push Security comparison

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

Greywall
View Greywall reviewGreywall alternatives
Push Security
View Push Security reviewPush Security alternatives

Browse these categories

Best AI Agent Memory & Runtimes toolsBest AI Threat Detection & SOC toolsBest AI Application & Code Security toolsBest AI Security & Privacy tools
Still deciding? Get the weekly AI tools brief

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

Last reviewed: July 3, 2026