ASAI Security ResearchIndependent public-source research
Public reviewread only

Vendor research

Obsidian AI Security

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.

Company scale

Growth stage
?Growth stageA provider with at least $25M in known funding or at least 51 employees that has not reached the scaled threshold.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.
  • $90M known funding
  • 51-200 employees
  • Founded 2017
  • Private-company revenue and profitability not sourced

Company context

Private independent company; reviewed Obsidian Security-controlled sources do not identify an acquirer or parent company

Obsidian says its platform processes more than 29 billion events monthly and serves large Fortune 500 and Global 2000 environments

Research coverageCounts describe available public research, not product quality.View details
Vendor statements
19 records
Source-checked records
16
Evaluation requirements
19 in this research model
Unresolved requirements
3

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.

Founded2017
HeadquartersHeadquarters not stated on the reviewed Obsidian Security-controlled pages
OwnershipPrivate independent company; reviewed Obsidian Security-controlled sources do not identify an acquirer or parent company
Employees51-200
Capital and scaleIndependent company

Obsidian Security

Known funding
$90M

Series B

Operating scale
Obsidian says its platform processes more than 29 billion events monthly and serves large Fortune 500 and Global 2000 environments
Backing context
Obsidian Security says it raised a $90 million Series B in 2023 and names IVP, Norwest, and GV as backers
Named investors

IVP · Norwest · GV

Founders and leadership3 people listed
  • Matt Wolff

    Co-Founder & Chief AI Officer

    Current role listed
  • Glenn Chisholm

    Co-Founder & Director

    Current role listed
  • Ben Johnson

    Co-Founder

    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
2017
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 limits6 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 sourceObsidian AI Security pageObsidian describes browser, prompt, agent, MCP, permission, runtime, and audit capabilities across enterprise AI use.Company sourceObsidian company pageObsidian provides its company timeline, funding milestone, investors, customer scale, and mission.Company sourceObsidian founding announcementObsidian's news archive identifies its 2017 founding team as Matt Wolff, Glenn Chisholm, and Ben Johnson.Company information sourceObsidian founder and board profileSupports the company facts shown in this profile.Company information sourceBen Johnson current company profileSupports the company facts shown in this profile.Company information sourceObsidian Security 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.

Business-application configuration securityCore product focusAction-taking agent safeguardsCore product focusEmployee AI access and usage controlsCore product focusBrowser and extension controlsCore product focusAI data protectionRelated coverageAI asset and configuration securityRelated coverageAI governance, risk, and complianceRelated coverageAgent identity and permissionsRelated coverageMachine and workload identityRelated coverageAI application runtime protectionRelated coverage

Buyer context

  • Treat Obsidian as a software as a service (SaaS)-native AI and agent security platform spanning browser use, software as a service (SaaS) permissions, OAuth, non-human identity, runtime actions, and AI-SPM.
  • Public evidence supports browser-level shadow AI, sensitive-prompt blocking, comprehensive agent inventory, Model Context Protocol (MCP) and model mapping, privilege right-sizing, execution-time guardrails, service-account resolution, and continuous audit evidence.
  • Public pages reviewed did not establish formal AI red teaming, direct agent-to-agent authorization, AI FinOps, or a public licensing unit.

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
15
Related requirements
11
References
58
Review related requirements →
Current referenceCSA AI Controls Matrix
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
14
References
71
Review related requirements →
Current referenceISO/IEC 42001
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
12
References
35
Review related requirements →
Current referenceMITRE ATLAS
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
12
References
71
Review related requirements →
Current referenceNIST AI RMF Playbook
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
13
References
39
Review related requirements →
Current referenceNIST Cybersecurity Framework 2.0
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
12
References
39
Review related requirements →
Informative referenceOWASP Agentic AI Security Solutions Landscape
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
12
References
31
Review related requirements →
Informative referenceOWASP GenAI Security Solutions Landscape
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
11
References
27
Review related requirements →
Current referenceOWASP Top 10 for Agentic Applications
Requirements with public support
15
Related requirements
13
References
31
Review related requirements →
Current referenceOWASP Top 10 for LLM Applications
Requirements with public support
15
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
    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.

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.

Limited public support
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.

Strong 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.

Strong 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.

Limited 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 →
Unapproved AI use discoverySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims browser-level discovery of unapproved AI tools, extensions, personal accounts, and unmanaged-device use.

browser-level discovery
AI-feature discovery in business applicationsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims continuous inventory of AI tools and agents across software as a service (SaaS), including software as a service (SaaS) permissions, OAuth connections, and shadow agents.

full visibility into every AI agent, its privileges, SaaS connections, and actions
Approved AI usage monitoringSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims continuous inventory of every AI tool, agent, large language model (LLM), and Model Context Protocol (MCP) server with ownership and access context.

every AI tool, agent, LLM, and MCP server
Controls for unapproved AI useSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims blocking high-risk unapproved AI use and agent actions through browser and runtime controls.

Block high-risk actions automatically at runtime
Sensitive-data protection for generative AISource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims blocking sensitive prompts before proprietary data leaves the browser for third-party generative AI platforms.

catching and blocking sensitive prompts at the source
Browser and business-application controlsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims browser-level AI discovery and source-level blocking of sensitive prompts, including personal accounts and unmanaged devices.

before they ever leave the browser
Show 13 additional evidence records
Generative AI application securitySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims execution-time guardrails blocking privilege escalation, excessive data access, and policy violations.

Detect and block high-risk agent actions at execution time
AI governance, risk, and complianceSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims continuous audit-ready evidence of agent ownership, access, infrastructure, and runtime guardrail operation.

continuous, audit-ready evidence
AI assurance and adversarial testingSource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims continuous OWASP-aligned risk scoring of agents when published or modified.

Continuous assessment maps every agent to OWASP risk factors
AI model and supply-chain securitySource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims detection of risky integrations, unapproved Model Context Protocol (MCP) connections, silent model swaps, and embedded credentials.

silent model swaps
AI gateway, tool-connection, and runtime controlsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims fine-grained execution-time guardrails using software as a service (SaaS) and Model Context Protocol (MCP) context to block unapproved actions.

Enforce guardrails directly at execution time
Action-taking agent monitoringSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims real-time visibility into agent actions, tool calls, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, models, permissions, owners, and connected apps.

the actions they take, the tools they call on, and the permissions they are granted in real time
Agent-to-agent communication securityNo supporting claim found

Obsidian materials reviewed did not provide a public claim for authenticating or authorizing direct agent-to-agent communication.

No quoted source text is recorded for this claim.
Non-human identity and service-account securitySource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims resolution of agent identity to service accounts, application programming interface (API) tokens, OAuth privileges, embedded credentials, and connected software as a service (SaaS) applications.

the real service accounts it runs as
AI agent identity and permissionsSource checkedStrong public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims tying agent actions to owners, executors, service accounts, permissions, OAuth access, and least-privilege enforcement.

Tie actions to the real owner and the executor for each agent
AI coding-agent and workstation securitySource checkedLimited public support for this requirement

Obsidian claims runtime monitoring across Cursor, code environments, Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers, tools, and software as a service (SaaS) applications.

across Copilot, Claude, Cursor, and the SaaS apps agents touch
AI cost and usage controlsNo supporting claim found

Obsidian materials reviewed did not provide a public claim for AI spend attribution, budgets, chargeback, rate limits, or token-cost anomaly detection.

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

Obsidian materials reviewed did not provide a public per-user, per-agent, event-volume, platform, or usage-based licensing unit for AI Security.

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

Obsidian claims out-of-the-box integrations across major AI platforms, software as a service (SaaS), cloud, endpoints, code, identity, and data systems.

across SaaS, cloud, endpoints, and code