ASAI Security ResearchIndependent public-source research
Public reviewread only

Vendor research

Knostic

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.

Employee AI and data3 related approaches

Company scale

Emerging
?EmergingAn early-stage provider with less than $25M in known funding, or 50 or fewer employees without at least $50M in known funding.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.
  • $14M known funding
  • 11-50 employees
  • Founded 2023
  • Private-company revenue and profitability not sourced

Company context

Private independent company; no acquisition or parent-company claim found on reviewed Knostic-controlled pages

Knostic positions its platform across AI agents, coding assistants, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, integrated development environment (IDE) extensions, citizen-coder applications, OpenClaw, and large language model (LLM)-powered vulnerability discovery

Research coverageCounts describe available public research, not product quality.View details
Vendor statements
19 records
Source-checked records
13
Evaluation requirements
19 in this research model
Unresolved requirements
6

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.

Founded2023
HeadquartersHerndon, Virginia
OwnershipPrivate independent company; no acquisition or parent-company claim found on reviewed Knostic-controlled pages
Employees11-50
Capital and scaleIndependent company

Knostic

Known funding
$14M

Seed · $11M · 2025-03-05

Operating scale
Knostic positions its platform across AI agents, coding assistants, MCP servers, IDE extensions, citizen-coder applications, OpenClaw, and LLM-powered vulnerability discovery
Backing context
$11M seed led by Bright Pixel Capital; $14M total reported, with DNX Ventures, Seedcamp, and Silicon Valley CISO Investments participating
Named investors

Bright Pixel Capital · DNX Ventures · Seedcamp · Silicon Valley CISO Investments

Founders and leadership2 people listed
  • Gadi Evron

    Co-Founder & CEO

    Current role listed
  • Sounil Yu

    Co-Founder & CTO

    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
2023
Workforce scale
11-50
Hiring activity
Not displayed

A current count requires a retained, clickable source URL.

Core company facts have supporting public sources.

Company sources and research limits4 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 sourceKnostic homepageKnostic says it discovers and secures AI agents, coding assistants, and associated supply-chain risks including MCP servers, skills, IDE extensions, and rules.Company sourceKnostic about pageKnostic describes visibility for Copilot and other LLM-based enterprise AI tools and lists its Herndon office address.Company sourceSecurityWeek funding profileSecurityWeek reported that Knostic was founded by Gadi Evron and Sounil Yu and had raised $14M after an $11M seed round.Company information sourceKnostic LinkedIn company profileSupports 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.

Action-taking agent safeguardsCore product focusAI application runtime protectionCore product focusCoding-agent and developer workstation securityCore product focusAI asset and configuration securityCore product focusAI data protectionRelated coverageAI gateway and tool-connection controlsRelated coverage

Buyer context

  • Treat Knostic as an agentic and AI coding-assistant security specialist with evidence around integrated development environment (IDE), Model Context Protocol (MCP), extension, secret/PII, and AI-SDLC controls.
  • Public evidence supports shadow-AI visibility, approved Copilot/enterprise-AI visibility, data-exfiltration controls, agent discovery, Model Context Protocol (MCP)/tooling supply-chain visibility, and large language model (LLM)-powered vulnerability discovery.
  • Public pages reviewed did not expose software as a service (SaaS) embedded-AI inventory, browser/session controls, non-human identity (NHI) lifecycle, AI FinOps, or pricing model claims.

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
12
Related requirements
11
References
58
Review related requirements →
Current referenceCSA AI Controls Matrix
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
14
References
71
Review related requirements →
Current referenceISO/IEC 42001
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
12
References
35
Review related requirements →
Current referenceMITRE ATLAS
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
12
References
71
Review related requirements →
Current referenceNIST AI RMF Playbook
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
13
References
39
Review related requirements →
Current referenceNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
12
References
39
Review related requirements →
Informative referenceOWASP Agentic AI Security Solutions Landscape
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
12
References
31
Review related requirements →
Informative referenceOWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
11
References
27
Review related requirements →
Current referenceOWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
13
References
31
Review related requirements →
Current referenceOWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications
Requirements with public support
12
Related requirements
13
References
25
Review related requirements →
Commercial Metadata
Requirements with public support
2
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.

No supporting claim found
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.

Limited 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.

Strong 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.

Strong 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.

No supporting claim found
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 checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic claims need-to-know policy capture, knowledge classification, oversharing discovery, policy tuning, control validation, traceable decisions, audit reporting, and consistent enforcement across enterprise large language models (LLMs) and agents.

Explicitly captures and manages per-user, per-topic need-to-know policies.
AI assurance and adversarial testingNo supporting claim found

Knostic and AgentMesh materials reviewed did not provide a public product claim for automated adversarial testing of customer models or agents, repeatable attack suites, or release-gate red teaming.

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

Knostic AgentMesh claims continuous discovery, version tracking, SHA-256 artifact identification, static-code scanning, and risk analysis for AI agent skills, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, integrated development environment (IDE) extensions, Claude Code plugins, and commands.

Continuously discovers, tracks, and scans AI agent skills, MCP servers, and IDE extensions for prompt injection and supply chain threats.
AI gateway, tool-connection, and runtime controlsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic Kirin claims runtime monitoring, prompt-injection blocking, unsafe-action prevention, least-privilege policy, and consistent guardrail enforcement across software as a service (SaaS), in-house, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) agents.

Track every agentic action and stop unsafe behavior in real time.
AI agent identity and permissionsSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Knostic claims OAuth-based agent authentication, agent-role to privilege mapping, least-privilege and need-to-know boundaries, and policy enforcement across software as a service (SaaS), in-house, and Model Context Protocol (MCP) agents.

Map agent roles to privileges and enforce need-to-know boundaries.
AI coding-agent and workstation securitySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic claims endpoint guardrails plus AgentMesh scanning for coding assistants, Claude and Cursor skills, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, integrated development environment (IDE) extensions, plugins, commands, code injection, cryptomining, reverse shells, and other agentic supply-chain threats.

Scan skills, MCP servers, and extensions before they touch your agents.
Show 13 additional evidence records
Unapproved AI use discoverySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic claims Shadow AI Spotlight provides visibility into unapproved AI tools usage.

Shadow AI Spotlight Visibility into unsanctioned AI tools usage
AI-feature discovery in business applicationsNo supporting claim found

Knostic materials reviewed did not provide a public claim for software as a service (SaaS) AI inventory, embedded software as a service (SaaS) AI features, or third-party software as a service (SaaS) AI provider monitoring.

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

Knostic claims comprehensive visibility for Copilot and other large language model (LLM)-based enterprise AI tools to identify oversharing, undersharing, and inference risks.

Knostic provides comprehensive visibility for Copilot and other LLM-based Enterprise AI tools, enabling enterprises to identify potential oversharing, undersharing and inference risks.
Controls for unapproved AI useSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic claims it detects shadow AI, blocks data exfiltration, and stops destructive commands.

We detect shadow AI, block data exfiltration, and stop destructive commands like rm -rf .
Sensitive-data protection for generative AISource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic claims OpenClaw controls for secret leaks, PII exposure, inbound secrets, and file-read operations.

Blocks destructive commands Redacts secrets and API keys Prevents PII exposure Logs and flags inbound secrets Gates exec and file-read operations
Browser and business-application controlsNo supporting claim found

Knostic materials reviewed did not provide a public claim for browser extension enforcement, enterprise browser controls, software as a service (SaaS)-session controls, or identity-aware software as a service (SaaS) policy.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Generative AI application securitySource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Knostic claims OpenAnt provides large language model (LLM)-powered vulnerability discovery for CI/CD pipelines with two-stage verification.

LLM-powered vulnerability discovery for CI/CD pipelines. Two-stage verification: Stage 1 detects, Stage 2 attacks - what survives is real
Action-taking agent monitoringSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Knostic claims discovery, detection and response, inventory, supply-chain, and posture management for coding agents and Model Context Protocol (MCP).

Agent discovery (Cursor, Claude, etc.) Detection & Response Inventory / Supply chain Security Posture Management Reputation service
Agent-to-agent communication securitySource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Knostic claims it secures AI agents, coding assistants, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, skills, integrated development environment (IDE) extensions, and rules as associated supply-chain risks.

Knostic discovers and secures AI agents and coding assistants, as well as associated supply chain risks, including MCP servers, skills, IDE extensions, and rules.
Non-human identity and service-account securityNo supporting claim found

Knostic materials reviewed did not provide a public claim for non-human identity (NHI) ownership, service-account lifecycle, credential rotation, scoped credentials, or least-privilege governance.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
AI cost and usage controlsNo supporting claim found

Knostic materials reviewed did not provide a public claim for AI spend attribution, model cost routing, budget enforcement, rate limits, or runaway token controls.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Licensing modelNo supporting claim found

Knostic materials reviewed did not provide a public per-user, per-seat, platform, usage-based, or enterprise pricing model.

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

Knostic claims it discovers and secures AI agents, coding assistants, and related supply-chain risks.

Knostic discovers and secures AI agents and coding assistants, as well as associated supply chain risks, including MCP servers, skills, IDE extensions, and rules.