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.
MCP and agent security for enterprises, from AI-BOM inventory to inline runtime enforcement.
Visit Website
Push Security delivers browser security for the AI era — stopping AiTM, ClickFix and consent phishing while governing shadow AI
Visit WebsiteWhat 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
No verifiable community signal. We scanned public discussion on Aug 17, 2026 and found posts matching the name “Mcp Gateway”, but could not establish that they are about this product rather than something else sharing its name. Rather than publish a score built on the wrong subject, we publish none.
Push Security
30 mentions across 3 sources · 34% positive — critical (weighted across 3 sources)
Hacker News, YouTube, Lemmy
What users praise
- • Interaction-level detection catches ClickFix, OAuth consent phishing and pastes that URL-reputation tools miss
- • Explicit AiTM, BitB and BitM reverse-proxy coverage addresses the phishing class that beats MFA
- • Shadow-AI discovery and policy enforcement is a genuinely differentiated control for 2025-era risk
- • No endpoint agent, no network appliance — deployment is extension-based and fast
What frustrates them
- • Nearly no independent community reviews — Reddit, Product Hunt and GitHub data is essentially absent
- • Browser-extension-only coverage leaves non-browser auth paths and mobile-first flows unmonitored
- • Blocking at the paste/upload/consent level risks interrupting legitimate workflows and generating tickets
- • Autonomous threat-hunting agents risk adding noise to already-overloaded SOC alert queues
Researched Oct 7, 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
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 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 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 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 3, 2026