ASAI Security ResearchIndependent public-source research
Public reviewread only

Vendor research

AIM Security / Cato Networks

Review what this vendor says publicly, the security topics those statements may support, what remains unverified, and factual company context. This is not an assessment of product effectiveness or fit.

Use-case context

How this vendor relates to the selected use case

Related research availableBack to use case →

These links show approaches associated with this vendor. The relationship label describes how the approach maps to the use case—not product effectiveness, complete requirement coverage, or fit.

Applications and agents3 related approaches

Company scale

Scaled
?ScaledA private provider with at least $100M in known funding or at least 250 employees.This is a company-scale signal, not a product-quality rating.

A descriptive band derived from retained public revenue, workforce, ownership, or funding signals.

Company scale is separate from product features, effectiveness, and suitability.
  • $1B known funding
  • 250-1000 employees
  • Founded 2015
Research coverageCounts describe available public research, not product quality.View details
Vendor statements
19 records
Source-checked records
14
Evaluation requirements
19 in this research model
Unresolved requirements
4

Company intelligence

Who is behind the product

Company facts provide evaluation context. Each signal is kept separate because tenure, workforce, funding, and hiring answer different questions.

Founded2022
HeadquartersTel Aviv, Israel
OwnershipAcquired by privately held Cato Networks
Employees250-1000
Capital and scaleOwned business

Cato Networks

Known funding
$1B

Series G · $409M · 2025-09-03

Operating scale
Cato reported more than $300M ARR when announcing the Aim acquisition
Backing context
Aim was backed by YL Ventures and Canaan Partners; pre-acquisition round amount was not confirmed in public sources reviewed; parent Cato expanded its Series G to $409M
Named investors

Vitruvian Partners · ION Crossover Partners · Lightspeed Venture Partners · Acrew Capital · Adams Street Partners

Founders and leadership1 person listed
  • Shlomo Kramer

    Co-Founder and CEO

    Current role listed
Operating signalsRead each signal separately

There is no combined company rating. The company-scale label uses stated size thresholds; product features and effectiveness require separate evidence.

Company tenure
2022
Workforce scale
250-1000
Hiring activity
Not displayed

A current count requires a retained, clickable source URL.

Open research questions
  • A current hiring source is not available, so the count is not shown.
Company sources and research limits5 linked public sources

Only company facts supported by retained public sources are shown. Missing values remain unknown, and company scale does not establish product effectiveness.

Company sourceCato Networks announcementCato announced acquiring Aim Security, surpassing $300M ARR, and expanding its Series G to $409M.Company sourceCB Insights company profilePublic company profile lists Aim as founded in 2022 and based in Tel Aviv.Company information sourcecompany_intelSupports the company facts shown in this profile.Company information sourcecompany_intelSupports the company facts shown in this profile.Company information sourceCato Series G funding announcementSupports the company facts shown in this profile.

Solution areas

These areas describe how the vendor approaches enterprise AI security. They do not establish product quality or fit.

Employee AI access and usage controlsCore product focusNetwork and cloud access controlsCore product focusAI data protectionRelated coverageBrowser and extension controlsRelated coverageAI application runtime protectionRelated coverageAction-taking agent safeguardsRelated coverage

Buyer context

  • Treat Aim as a Cato platform extension for procurement, commercial leverage, roadmap, and support.
  • Public claims may be most relevant where the buyer is also evaluating SASE/SSE consolidation, not only AI security point tooling.

Related frameworks

Where public vendor statements relate to framework requirements

11 related frameworks · expand when needed
These links show related requirements for further review. They do not establish framework compliance or control implementation. Open the full framework crosswalk →
Current referenceCIS Critical Security Controls
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
11
References
58
Review related requirements →
Current referenceCSA AI Controls Matrix
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
14
References
71
Review related requirements →
Current referenceISO/IEC 42001
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
12
References
35
Review related requirements →
Current referenceMITRE ATLAS
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
12
References
71
Review related requirements →
Current referenceNIST AI RMF Playbook
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
13
References
39
Review related requirements →
Current referenceNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
12
References
39
Review related requirements →
Informative referenceOWASP Agentic AI Security Solutions Landscape
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
12
References
31
Review related requirements →
Informative referenceOWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
11
References
27
Review related requirements →
Current referenceOWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
13
References
31
Review related requirements →
Current referenceOWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications
Requirements with public support
14
Related requirements
13
References
25
Review related requirements →
Commercial Metadata
Requirements with public support
3
Related requirements
3
References
3
Review related requirements →

Evaluation questions

What to verify beyond public claims

These questions come from security requirements with some public support. Use them as starting points for demonstrations, documentation review, customer references, or a buyer-observed pilot.

  1. 01
    Unapproved AI use discovery

    An unmanaged AI app used by a test user appears in discovery inventory with user, app or domain, and timestamp.

  2. 02
    Unapproved AI use discovery

    The test user's AI usage activity can be filtered or exported with AI-specific context.

  3. 03
    Approved AI usage monitoring

    Approved AI workspace activity appears with user, workspace or tenant, model or provider, and timestamp.

  4. 04
    Approved AI usage monitoring

    Prompt, model, or admin activity can be exported or correlated for the selected approved AI platform.

  5. 05
    Controls for unapproved AI use

    A policy blocks, coaches, redirects, or contains a test interaction with an unapproved AI destination.

  6. 06
    Controls for unapproved AI use

    The control event records policy reason, user, destination, action, and timestamp.

  7. 07
    Sensitive-data protection for generative AI

    Sensitive prompt, response, or file test data is detected and classified during an AI interaction.

  8. 08
    Sensitive-data protection for generative AI

    A policy redacts, blocks, coaches, or records the sensitive data event before it leaves the approved path.

Detailed security-requirement research18 evaluation items · supporting evidence and open research are shown separatelyExpand
Security requirementPublic supportRelated frameworksWhat to verify
AI-feature discovery in business applications

Inventory software as a service (SaaS) applications that embed AI features, expose enterprise data to AI capabilities, or create AI-driven data movement.

No supporting claim found
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A software as a service (SaaS) app with an embedded AI feature appears in the software as a service (SaaS) AI inventory with app, provider, and feature context.

Browser and business-application controls

Apply session-level controls in browser and software as a service (SaaS) workflows, including uploads, downloads, copy/paste, sharing, and identity-aware access decisions.

Limited public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A session-level policy controls upload, download, copy, paste, sharing, or form submission in a browser or software as a service (SaaS) workflow.

Generative AI application security

Protect enterprise-built large language model (LLM) applications, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems, prompts, application programming interfaces (APIs), model calls, tools, and production runtime behavior.

Strong public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A test large language model (LLM) application event records prompt, application programming interface (API), model, retrieval, or tool interaction context.

AI governance, risk, and compliance

Inventory AI systems and owners, translate policy and regulatory obligations into governed workflows, assess risk, manage approvals and exceptions, and retain audit evidence across the AI lifecycle.

Limited public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A test AI system is registered with owner, intended use, risk tier, lifecycle state, and applicable obligations.

AI assurance and adversarial testing

Test models, applications, retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems, and agents before release and continuously thereafter using adversarial probes, evaluation suites, attack simulation, and security release gates.

No supporting claim found
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A controlled test campaign exercises an AI model, application, or agent against named AI attack classes.

AI model and supply-chain security

Discover, inventory, scan, validate, and monitor models, datasets, model artifacts, registries, dependencies, and AI development assets for tampering, unsafe serialization, provenance gaps, or malicious content.

Limited public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A test model or AI artifact appears in inventory with origin, version, hash or provenance, and deployment context.

AI gateway, tool-connection, and runtime controls

Mediate model, agent, tool, application programming interface (API), connector, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) traffic through an enforcement point that applies identity-aware policy, content controls, routing, rate limits, and auditable allow or deny decisions.

Strong public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A model, agent, tool, or Model Context Protocol (MCP) request passes through a named policy enforcement point.

Non-human identity and service-account security

Inventory, least privilege, credential hygiene, monitoring, and lifecycle management for non-human identities, workloads, service accounts, application programming interface (API) keys, and machine credentials.

Limited public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A test service account, agent identity, or non-human identity appears in inventory with owner and privileges.

AI agent identity and permissions

Register AI agents as accountable identities, bind them to owners and delegating users, authorize task- and tool-level access, issue short-lived credentials, review access, and revoke or suspend agent authority.

Limited public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A test agent is registered with a unique identity, accountable owner, purpose, and permitted resources.

AI coding-agent and workstation security

Discover and govern AI coding agents, integrated development environment (IDE) assistants, command-line agents, skills, hooks, extensions, Model Context Protocol (MCP) tools, filesystem access, commands, network activity, secrets, and software-supply-chain actions on developer workstations and build environments.

Strong public support
NIST AI RMF PlaybookNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0CIS Critical Security ControlsISO/IEC 42001OWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape

A test coding agent and its skills, hooks, extensions, or Model Context Protocol (MCP) tools appear in an attributable inventory.

Licensing model

Publicly discoverable commercial model such as per user, per seat, per app, per token, per integration, or enterprise platform license.

No supporting claim found
Commercial MetadataCSA AI Controls Matrix

The vendor can map the sourced commercial model to per-user, per-seat, per-app, per-token, per-integration, or platform packaging.

Public sources

Vendor statements and quoted evidence

Showing the first 6 of 19 source records. Open additional records only when needed.

Open all vendor evidence →
AI governance, risk, and complianceSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Cato AI Security claims discovery and inventory of managed, local, and shadow agents, centralized runtime visibility, security posture, compliance-risk remediation, and corporate policy across users, agents, applications, models, and tools.

Gain visibility into which agents exist, what data sources and tools they can access, and how they behave at runtime.
AI assurance and adversarial testingNo supporting claim found

Cato AI Security and AIM materials reviewed did not provide a public customer-facing product claim for automated adversarial testing, repeatable attack suites, model or agent red teaming, or release-gate evaluation.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
AI model and supply-chain securitySource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Cato and AIM claim continuous AI-SPM scanning of internal models, agent configurations, Model Context Protocol (MCP) connections, training environments, misconfigurations, and vulnerabilities before production.

Continuously discovers, detects, and remediates AI security and compliance risks before they reach production, and scans internal AI models for misconfigurations and vulnerabilities.
AI gateway, tool-connection, and runtime controlsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Cato AI Security claims runtime policy across user prompts, model outputs, tool calls, and tool messages, blocking or redacting sensitive data and indirect prompt injection before content reaches an agent or model.

Enforces runtime policies across all four inspection points: user prompts, model outputs, tool calls, and tool messages.
AI agent identity and permissionsSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Cato AI Security claims visibility into agent configurations, licenses, data and tool access, plus corporate policy enforcement and blocking of unauthorized access or unsafe actions across managed and local agents.

Reduce the risk of unauthorized access, sensitive data exposure, and unsafe agent actions.
AI coding-agent and workstation securitySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Cato claims endpoint discovery and runtime control for Cursor, Claude Code, and other coding agents, covering configurations, licenses, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, prompts, model outputs, tool calls, tool messages, credentials, PII, and malicious tool responses.

Discover and secure AI agents that run on user endpoints, such as coding agents.
Show 13 additional evidence records
AI cost and usage controlsNo supporting claim found

Cato AI Security materials reviewed did not provide a public product claim for AI usage-cost attribution, token or spend metrics, budgets, chargeback, or cost-aware model routing.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Unapproved AI use discoverySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

AIM Security (now Cato AI Security) claims it surfaces AI adoption trends, assesses risks, and detects unauthorized data exchange with public AI services.

With Cato, IT teams can understand AI adoption trends with the business, assess risks and enforce granular access controls, and detect unauthorized data exchange with public AI services in real-time.
AI-feature discovery in business applicationsNo supporting claim found

No public claim found for this capability.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Approved AI usage monitoringSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

AIM Security (Cato) claims it gives full visibility and control into which generative AI apps are used and what data is shared with the AI models.

full visibility and control into what GenAI apps are used, and what data is shared with the AI models
Controls for unapproved AI useSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

AIM Security (Cato) claims it enforces granular access controls, prevents data leakage, and limits AI misuse via policy enforcement.

enforce granular access controls, and detect unauthorized data exchange with public AI services in real-time.
Sensitive-data protection for generative AISource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

AIM Security (Cato) claims monitoring and governing prompts and responses prevents data leakage and supports governance and compliance.

By monitoring and governing prompt and responses, inline, using APIs or with a browser extension, organizations can prevent data leakage, limit misuse, and ensure governance and compliance for AI use.
Action-taking agent monitoringSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

AIM Security (Cato) claims it monitors every interaction between agents, models, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers to keep agents secure and compliant.

monitor every interaction between agents, models, and MCP servers, to ensure agents operate securely, remain complaint, and align with business needs.
Agent-to-agent communication securitySource checkedRelated public context only

Cato AI Security claims monitoring every interaction between agents, models, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers helps ensure agents operate securely and remain aligned with business needs.

monitor every interaction between agents, models, and MCP servers, to ensure agents operate securely, remain complaint, and align with business needs.
Non-human identity and service-account securitySource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Cato AI Security claims it discovers and analyzes enterprise AI agent activity and monitors interactions between agents, models, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers.

monitor every interaction between agents, models, and MCP servers
Browser and business-application controlsSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

AIM (Cato) claims it lets organizations use generative AI securely with full visibility and control into which apps are used and what data is shared.

full visibility and control into what GenAI apps are used, and what data is shared with the AI models
Generative AI application securitySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

AIM (Cato) claims it secures private AI applications in runtime and detects runtime AI attacks and compliance violations.

Homegrown AI applications and AI agents are attractive targets for internal and external attacks—an emerging threat vector that requires dedicated defenses. Using proprietary models specifically trained to detect all types of runtime AI attacks and compliance violations, IT teams can support enterprise-scale secure delivery of AI apps and agents.
Approved AI platform contextNo supporting claim found

No public claim found for this capability.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.