Mcp Gateway vs Push Security
Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and ratings
At a glance
| Dimension | Mcp Gateway | Push Security |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Contact sales | Freemium |
| Primary Focus | Agentic AI lifecycle security & governance | Browser-based attack detection & AI usage control |
| Key Feature | AI agent inventory (AI-BOM), automated red teaming, policy enforcement | AiTM phishing, ClickFix detection, AI tool DLP |
| Deployment | Cloud platform with integrations | Browser extension (cloud-based) |
| Target User | Enterprise security & AI platform teams | Security & identity teams |
| Latest News | 2026-06-28: Integrated with TrueFoundry AI Gateway | 2026-06-26: Experienced poisoned tenant attack, shared lessons |
Choose Push Security if your priority is browser-side attack prevention (AiTM, session hijacking) and controlling employee AI tool usage without switching browsers. Choose Mcp Gateway if you need to govern agentic AI at scale—inventory agents, test adversarial attacks, and enforce compliance (NIST/OWASP). For most organizations, Push is the tactical choice for immediate browser threats; Mcp Gateway is strategic for managing internal AI development and supply chain risk.
Enterprise AI security for agentic systems — discover, assess, protect every AI agent.
Visit Website
What real users say: Mcp Gateway 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.
Mcp Gateway
73 mentions across 5 sources · 44% positive — mixed
Hacker News, YouTube, Product Hunt, GitHub, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Turns REST/gRPC APIs into MCP endpoints with zero code changes.
- • Lightweight and open-source, with Docker support for quick deployment.
- • Integrates with major AI gateways like Kong, Portkey, and LiteLLM.
- • Addresses the real problem of MCP tool overload for enterprise teams.
What frustrates them
- • Security features lack community validation — users haven't confirmed them.
- • Open-source version has 120 open issues, raising reliability concerns.
- • Handling API version changes or breaking changes is unclear.
- • No clarity on whether transformation is instant or requires schema tweaks.
Researched Aug 17, 2026
Push Security
36 mentions across 3 sources · 30% positive — critical
Hacker News, YouTube, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Deploys as extension across all major browsers, avoiding enterprise lock-in
- • Autonomous hunting agents detect and block zero-day threats in real time
- • Addresses emerging AiTM phishing, ClickFix, and session hijacking attacks
- • Provides shadow AI discovery and governance, a growing need
What frustrates them
- • Limited independent reviews and community deployment case studies
- • Extension-based agent may impact browser performance on low-end devices
- • Pricing for advanced features likely steep for SMBs
- • Configuration complexity requires skilled security engineers
Researched Aug 18, 2026
Who should pick which
- Security team facing rising AiTM phishing & session hijackingPick: Push Security
Push Security directly detects and blocks AiTM, session hijacking, and ClickFix attacks in the browser, with real-time telemetry and autonomous threat hunting.
- AI platform team needing governance for internal agentic AIPick: Mcp Gateway
Mcp Gateway provides AI agent inventory (AI-BOM), posture mapping against NIST/OWASP, and automated red teaming, ideal for securing in-house AI agents.
- Compliance officer ensuring AI regulatory alignmentPick: Mcp Gateway
Mcp Gateway's compliance-focused features (NIST/OWASP alignment, supply chain assessment) and recent AI compliance framework publication support regulatory requirements.
- Solo founder or small team with limited budgetPick: Push Security
Push's freemium pricing allows starting with browser security at no cost, while Mcp Gateway requires sales contact, likely enterprise pricing.
- Organization securing employee AI tool usage (shadow AI)Pick: Push Security
Push provides real-time AI tool visibility, in-browser DLP (clipboard, file uploads), and blocks malicious OAuth integrations, directly addressing shadow AI.
Frequently Asked Questions
Mcp Gateway vs Push Security: which should you choose?
Choose Push Security if your priority is browser-side attack prevention (AiTM, session hijacking) and controlling employee AI tool usage without switching browsers. Choose Mcp Gateway if you need to govern agentic AI at scale—inventory agents, test adversarial attacks, and enforce compliance (NIST/OWASP). For most organizations, Push is the tactical choice for immediate browser threats; Mcp Gateway is strategic for managing internal AI development and supply chain risk.
Which tool is better for detecting browser-based phishing attacks?
Push Security is specifically designed for browser-based attacks like AiTM phishing, ClickFix, and session hijacking. Mcp Gateway does not cover browser threats.
Can Mcp Gateway see inside user browsers?
No. Mcp Gateway focuses on securing AI agents, models, and data flows, not end-user browser activity. Push Security operates as a browser extension.
Do these tools integrate with each other?
There is no announced integration. They serve different security domains (browser vs. AI lifecycle) and could be complementary in a broader stack.
Which tool is easier to deploy?
Push Security is a browser extension deployable via MDM or manually, with a freemium tier. Mcp Gateway is a cloud platform that requires integration with AI gateways and development pipelines, likely more complex.
Do either support compliance with AI regulations?
Mcp Gateway explicitly aligns with NIST and OWASP frameworks and published an AI compliance framework (2026-06-10). Push Security addresses compliance via browser controls (e.g., data loss prevention for AI tools).
Can I test either tool for free?
Push Security offers a freemium version. Mcp Gateway requires contacting sales, though a free trial may be available upon inquiry.
Which tool is better for securing AI model supply chains?
Mcp Gateway includes supply chain risk assessment for AI dependencies. Push Security does not cover model supply chains.
Do these tools work on mobile devices?
Push Security detects mobile phishing via SMS/QR codes but does not operate as a mobile app. Mcp Gateway does not cover mobile endpoints.
More Mcp Gateway 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
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 (
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
Explore each tool further
Browse these categories
One email a week — new tools, honest comparisons, no spam.
Last reviewed: July 3, 2026