Pipelock vs Push Security

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

Analysis reviewed Live tool data as of 2026-10-19
Cross-checked through our multi-step verification ·
Saved

At a glance

DimensionPipelockPush Security
PricingFreemium (core engine free Apache 2.0; paid plans for multi-agent and fleet governance)Freemium (starts free, paid tiers for advanced features)
Primary FocusAgent egress control for MCP, credential exfiltration, and prompt injectionBrowser-based attacks (AiTM, ClickFix, session hijacking) and AI tool data leakage
Deployment ModelSelf-hosted open-source agent firewall (Linux/macOS)Cloud-based (browser extension + telemetry)
Key IntegrationsClaude Code, Cursor, VS Code, JetBrains, Prometheus, GitHub ActionsOkta, Azure AD, Google Workspace, Slack, Splunk, Snowflake
Latest Release/News2026-06-23: v3.0 with fail-closed defaults, signed self-update, Conductor fleet ops2026-06-26: Published post-mortem on poisoned tenant attack
Best ForTeams deploying coding agents needing network egress control, compliance evidenceSecurity teams, identity teams, organizations securing AI tool usage

Choose Push Security if your priority is protecting browser-based interactions (AiTM, ClickFix, session hijacking) and controlling AI tool data leakage across all browsers without forcing a single browser. Choose Pipelock if you run coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor) and need an open-source, kernel-enforced firewall to prevent credential exfiltration and prompt injection with verifiable audit trails.

Try PipelockTry Push Security
Pipelock
Pipelock

Pipelock is an open-source agent firewall that mediates MCP, HTTP and WebSocket traffic and signs offline-verifiable receipts.

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
$49/mo
$490/yr
$5,000
$15,000/year one
$5/user/month
Custom
Popularity
9 views
7.5k views
Skill Level
Intermediate
Advanced
API Available
Platforms
CLI
Web
Categories
🛡️ AI Governance & Guardrails
🚨 Threat Detection & SOC🔒 Security & Privacy
Features
Agent firewall mediating MCP, HTTP and WebSocket traffic at the agent boundary
Fixed-order scanner pipeline with 65 DLP credential patterns and checksum validation
34 prompt-injection patterns with 6-pass normalization (zero-width, homoglyphs, leetspeak)
DLP inspection runs before DNS resolution
SSRF, private-IP and cloud-metadata blocking
Canary tokens plant a synthetic secret and alert when it moves
MCP stdio subprocess wrapping with tool poisoning and rug-pull tracking
MCP tool policy engine with warn, block, redirect or defer actions
Kill switch OR-composing 7 independent sources, fail-closed by default
Adaptive escalation with 3 levels, human-in-the-loop approvals, auto-recovery
Kernel-enforced egress containment via nftables owner-match on Linux
Process sandbox: Landlock, seccomp and network namespaces on Linux; sandbox-exec (Seatbelt) on macOS
Ed25519-signed action receipts and hash-chained flight recorder
Offline receipt verification in Go, TypeScript, Rust, Python and in-browser
Prometheus and OpenTelemetry (OTLP) metrics export
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
Claude Code
Cursor
VS Code
JetBrains
Zed
Codex CLI
OpenClaw
Continue
Cline
OpenCode
LangGraph
CrewAI
Google ADK
AutoGen
OpenAI Agents
Proofpoint
Okta
Google Workspace
Microsoft 365
Microsoft Teams
Microsoft Sentinel
Datadog
Splunk
SentinelOne
Slack

What real users say: Pipelock 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.

Pipelock

28 mentions across 4 sources · 60% positive — mixed (averaged across 4 sources)

Hacker News, YouTube, GitHub, Lemmy

What users praise

  • • Capability separation: agent lacks network, fetch proxy lacks secrets—clean threat model.
  • • Ships signed Ed25519 action receipts for verifiable, offline audit evidence.
  • • Flat-rate pricing—no per-seat costs as agent count scales.
  • • Open-source Apache 2.0 core, self-hostable, no phone home or machine binding.

What frustrates them

  • • Only 28 community posts, many off-topic—hard to judge real-world satisfaction.
  • • Entropy scan for encoded secrets questioned; methodology may be flawed.
  • • No clear answer on multi-agent delegation; sub-agent exfiltration may slip.
  • • YouTube results are about mechanical pencils, not the tool—brand confusion.

Researched Aug 17, 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 team combatting AiTM phishing
    Pick: Push Security

    Push Security directly detects and blocks adversary-in-the-middle attacks, ClickFix, and session hijacking in real-time across all browsers.

  • Team running Claude Code agents in CI/CD
    Pick: Pipelock

    Pipelock's agent firewall blocks secret leaks and prompt injection with kernel-enforced egress control, integrated via GitHub Actions.

  • Identity team enforcing MFA/SSO adoption
    Pick: Push Security

    Push provides in-browser guardrails for MFA registration and password changes, plus visibility into ghost logins and shadow SaaS.

  • Compliance officer needing audit evidence for EU AI Act
    Pick: Pipelock

    Pipelock emits Ed25519-signed audit reports with hash-chained flight records, mapping directly to EU AI Act and OWASP Agentic Top 10.

  • Solo developer using Cursor with custom agents
    Pick: Pipelock

    Free open-source engine with no per-agent pricing; can self-host and get DLP and prompt injection protection out of the box.

Frequently Asked Questions

Pipelock vs Push Security: which should you choose?

Choose Push Security if your priority is protecting browser-based interactions (AiTM, ClickFix, session hijacking) and controlling AI tool data leakage across all browsers without forcing a single browser. Choose Pipelock if you run coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor) and need an open-source, kernel-enforced firewall to prevent credential exfiltration and prompt injection with verifiable audit trails.

Can Push Security protect against prompt injection?

Push Security does not specifically mention prompt injection detection; it focuses on browser-based attacks and AI data leakage. Pipelock includes 29 prompt-injection detection patterns.

Does Pipelock support multi-browser environments?

No, Pipelock is an agent firewall for coding agents and MCP traffic, not for browser security. Push Security supports all major browsers.

Do either tools require an enterprise browser?

No. Push Security works across existing browsers via extension; Pipelock installs as a system daemon.

Can Pipelock block OAuth phishing?

Pipelock's focus is on agent egress and MCP; it does not handle OAuth attacks in the browser. Push Security detects malicious OAuth integrations.

Which tool is better for compliance with NIST AI RMF?

Pipelock explicitly maps to NIST AI RMF and provides signed audit evidence. Push Security does not mention compliance mapping.

Are the tools cloud-based or on-premises?

Push Security is cloud-based; Pipelock is self-hosted (open-source, Linux/macOS).

Do they integrate with Slack?

Push Security integrates with Slack. Pipelock integrates with Prometheus and OTLP but not Slack.

Can I use both together?

Yes, they address complementary vectors: Push for browser security, Pipelock for agent egress. They can be deployed together without conflict.

More Pipelock 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

Pipelock
View Pipelock reviewPipelock alternatives
Push Security
View Push Security reviewPush Security alternatives

Browse these categories

Best AI AI Governance & Guardrails toolsBest AI Threat Detection & SOC 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