ASAI Security ResearchIndependent public-source research
Public reviewread only

Vendor research

Lakera / Check Point

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

No related approach foundBack 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.

Governance and riskNo related approach

No solution approach in the current research connects this vendor to this use case.

Company scale

Established
?EstablishedA provider with at least $1B in annual revenue, at least 1,000 employees, or backing from an established owner.This is a company-maturity 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.
  • $2.7B annual revenue (2025-12-31)
  • $30M known funding
  • 51-200 employees
  • Founded 2021

Company context

Public-company subsidiary / AI security center under Check Point (NASDAQ: CHKP)

Check Point positions Lakera as the foundation for its Global Center of Excellence for AI Security

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
5

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.

Founded2021
HeadquartersDual-headquartered in Zurich, Switzerland and San Francisco, California
OwnershipPublic-company subsidiary / AI security center under Check Point (NASDAQ: CHKP)
Employees51-200
Capital and scaleIndependent company

Lakera

Known funding
$30M

Series A · $20M · 2024-07-24

Current owner annual revenue
$2.7B

CHECK POINT SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD (CHKP) · period ended 2025-12-31 · filed 2026-03-31

Operating scale
Check Point positions Lakera as the foundation for its Global Center of Excellence for AI Security
Backing context
Formerly VC-backed; raised $20M Series A led by Atomico before acquisition
Named investors

Atomico · Citi Ventures · Dropbox Ventures · redalpine

Founders and leadership3 people listed
  • David Haber

    Co-Founder & CEO before acquisition

    Status not confirmed
  • Dr. Mateo Rojas-Carulla

    Co-Founder

    Status not confirmed
  • Dr. Matthias Kraft

    Co-Founder

    Status not confirmed
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
2021
Workforce scale
51-200
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 sourceCheck Point acquisition announcementCheck Point announced acquiring Lakera and described Lakera as founded in 2021 and dual-headquartered in Zurich and San Francisco.Company sourceLakera Series A announcementLakera announced a $20M Series A led by Atomico, bringing total funding to $30M before acquisition.Company information sourceLakera LinkedIn company profileSupports the company facts shown in this profile.Regulatory filing20-F annual filingCHECK POINT SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD (CHKP) · period ended 2025-12-31

Solution areas

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

AI application runtime protectionCore product focusAI testing and adversarial assuranceCore product focusAction-taking agent safeguardsCore product focusEndpoint AI application controlsRelated coverageBrowser and extension controlsRelated coverageAI data protectionRelated coverageEmployee AI access and usage controlsRelated coverage

Buyer context

  • Public-company ownership may improve procurement comfort for global buyers but changes roadmap diligence to Check Point integration.
  • Particularly relevant for AI app and agent runtime security rather than workforce/software as a service (SaaS) discovery alone.

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

    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.

  4. 04
    AI-feature discovery in business applications

    The inventory shows which users, data classes, integrations, or providers are associated with the AI-enabled software as a service (SaaS) app.

  5. 05
    Approved AI usage monitoring

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

  6. 06
    Approved AI usage monitoring

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

  7. 07
    Controls for unapproved AI use

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

  8. 08
    Controls for unapproved AI use

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

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.

Strong public support
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.

Strong 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.

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.

No supporting claim found
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

Check Point AI Agent Security claims continuous agent inventory, holistic risk ratings, contributing-factor explanations, and risk mappings to OWASP and MITRE ATLAS.

Every discovered agent gets a holistic risk rating with the contributing factors explained.
AI assurance and adversarial testingNo supporting claim found

Check Point AI Agent Security and Lakera Guard materials reviewed did not provide a public customer-facing product claim for automated adversarial testing, repeatable attack suites, or release-gate red teaming.

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

Check Point AI Agent Security claims posture detection for unofficial, unknown, or vulnerable Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, untrusted components, suspicious tool code, and likely-malicious tools.

Flags unofficial, unknown, and vulnerable MCP servers, untrusted components, and suspicious or likely-malicious tool code.
AI gateway, tool-connection, and runtime controlsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Check Point AI Agent Security claims real-time Guard application programming interface (API) screening and enforcement across prompts, tool calls, tool responses, tool descriptions, data leakage, content violations, and off-policy agent behavior.

Real-time screening and flagging of prompt attacks, data leakage, content violations, and off-policy agent behavior through the Guard API.
AI agent identity and permissionsSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Check Point AI Agent Security claims tool allow or deny controls and posture findings for missing authentication, static credentials, and execution under an author’s credentials.

Tool Allow/Deny List limits available actions.
AI coding-agent and workstation securityNo supporting claim found

Check Point AI Agent Security and Lakera Guard materials reviewed did not establish controls specifically for coding-agent commands, developer-workstation files or networks, integrated development environment (IDE) extensions, hooks, secrets, or package actions.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Show 13 additional evidence records
AI cost and usage controlsNo supporting claim found

Lakera Workforce AI Security and Guard 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

Lakera claims Workforce AI Security discovers shadow AI and stops sensitive data exposure across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, integrated development environments (IDEs), and Model Context Protocol (MCP)-connected tools.

Discover shadow AI, assess risk, govern employee usage, and stop sensitive data exposure across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, IDEs, and MCP-connected tools.
AI-feature discovery in business applicationsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Lakera claims workforce AI visibility and policy enforcement across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, integrated development environments (IDEs), Model Context Protocol (MCP)-connected tools, and software as a service (SaaS) services.

Employee AI usage is spreading faster than traditional controls can keep up — across browser tools, desktop apps, copilots, IDEs, and connected SaaS services.
Approved AI usage monitoringSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Lakera claims employee AI usage includes approved and unapproved tools across browser, desktop, and software as a service (SaaS).

Teams are using sanctioned and unsanctioned AI tools across the browser, desktop, and SaaS.
Controls for unapproved AI useSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Lakera claims security teams need policy by app, user, data type, and action for employee AI usage.

Security teams need policy by app, user, data type, and action — not blanket allow or block decisions.
Sensitive-data protection for generative AISource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Lakera claims Workforce AI Security stops sensitive data exposure across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, integrated development environments (IDEs), and Model Context Protocol (MCP)-connected tools.

Discover shadow AI, assess risk, govern employee usage, and stop sensitive data exposure across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, IDEs, and MCP-connected tools.
Action-taking agent monitoringSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Lakera claims AI-agent landscape discovery, risk assessment, and real-time protection enforcement.

Discover your agent landscape, assess risk, and enforce protection in real time.
Agent-to-agent communication securitySource checkedRelated public context only

Lakera claims AI Agent Security provides visibility into agent usage and Model Context Protocol (MCP)-connected systems, adjacent to agent-to-tool security.

AI Agent Security provides visibility into agent usage and MCP-connected systems across your environment, including agents your teams did not explicitly build or register.
Non-human identity and service-account securityNo supporting claim found

No public claim found for this capability.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Browser and business-application controlsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Lakera claims Workforce AI Security discovers shadow AI and governs employee usage across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, integrated development environments (IDEs), and Model Context Protocol (MCP)-connected tools.

Discover shadow AI, assess risk, govern employee usage, and stop sensitive data exposure across AI apps, browser extensions, desktop agents, IDEs, and MCP-connected tools.
Generative AI application securitySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Lakera claims it secures AI agents from discovery to runtime and enforces protection in real time.

Secure AI Agents from Discovery to Runtime
Licensing modelNo supporting claim found

No public claim found for this capability.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Approved AI platform contextNo supporting claim found

No public claim found for this capability.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.