All analysis was generated autonomously, without human review. Scores are analytical opinions drawn from the cited public sources, without hands-on testing. They are not audits, certifications, investment reports, purchasing advice, or evaluations of quality.
Adversa AI sells enterprises a platform that tracks what AI coding agents such as Claude Code and Cursor do and blocks dangerous actions, such as wiping a database, before they complete. Adversa says the platform is in early access, with production deployments including a financial institution. Founded in 2021, it also sells AI red teaming, in which its lab attacks customers’ AI models and agents to find flaws. Adversa says its lab turns the attacks it finds into the platform’s default blocking rules. CTech reports it raised about $200,000. Adversa names Foundry and Moxxie Ventures as venture backers without stating amounts. Adversa faces vendors such as Palo Alto Networks, which sells AI red teaming with protection for AI systems in use and could add coding-agent coverage.
| Description | Adversa AI sells a runtime control platform that watches AI coding agents and blocks dangerous chains of their actions, and runs AI red teaming for models, agents, and MCP servers. | [f1] |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2021 | [f2] |
| HQ | Tel Aviv, Israel | [f3] |
| Funding | $0.2M total | [f2] |
| Latest funding | Approximately $200,000 (round type undisclosed) | [f2] |
| Deployment | SaaS | [f4] |
| Compliance | ISO 27001, SOC 2 Type 2 | [f4] |
| Product | What it does |
|---|---|
| Coding Agent Security Platform | Runtime control layer for AI coding agents that links model calls, tool executions, and endpoint actions into chains and blocks dangerous ones. In early access. |
| Adversa AI Red Teaming | Autonomous red teaming for models, AI applications, agents, and MCP servers, sold as software, a managed service, or a scoped engagement. |
AI Defense Matrix
| Govern | Identify | Protect | Detect | Respond | Recover | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI-Workload Platforms Inference servers, training platforms, vector DB platforms, and the model-loading supply chain. | ||||||
| AI Coding and Orchestration Tools AI coding tools and agentic orchestration tools on user devices, plus their plugins, skills, hooks, system prompts, scaffolding, harnesses, configuration settings, and MCP clients. | ||||||
| AI-Generated Code Code produced by AI tools, AI-assisted reviews, AI-generated infrastructure-as-code and tests, and vibe-coded apps that bypass CI/CD. | ||||||
| AI Traffic Paths to external and self-hosted AI services, MCP tool channels, agent-to-agent calls, model-registry downloads, and egress to unapproved AI services. AI gateways, LLM routers, and MCP gateways steer traffic along those paths. The steering decisions and their inputs belong here too: routing policies, MCP server registries, and agent naming and discovery services. | ||||||
| AI Model Model weights, fine-tuning checkpoints, model cards, registries, an AI bill of materials (AIBOM), and the third-party LLMs your enterprise consumes. | ||||||
| Training Data Datasets used for training, fine-tuning, and continued learning. | ||||||
| Runtime AI Data User prompts, inference inputs, RAG content, vector DB content, persistent agent memory, and interaction history. | ||||||
| AI Agent Identities AI agents as non-human principals, plus credentials, keys, permission scopes, service accounts, and delegation chains across agents and tools. |
Adversa AI Red Teaming tests for vulnerability classes across agents, models, and MCP, re-scanning on every model, prompt, or tool update. It is mapped to the AI Defense Matrix. [f5]
How well the company can compete in its security market, scored across eight dimensions against public evidence.
| Dimension | Score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Problem Clarity How precisely the company defines its problem, with evidence the problem exists at the scale claimed. | 3/5 | Adversa targets enterprises deploying coding agents whose chained actions can delete data, leak secrets, or ship malicious code. The Register, Help Net Security, and SecurityWeek covered Adversa's disclosures of attacks on those agents. The cited sources contain no independent quantification of incident frequency or costs for enterprises buying protection. [s1, s2, s7, s9, s11] |
| Capability Depth How specific the technical capabilities are, with evidence beyond marketing claims such as docs and third-party validation. | 4/5 | Adversa documents a gateway on agent traffic, endpoint sensors, and chain-level blocking on its platform page, and an attack engine running on its own on-prem AI models on its red-teaming page. Outside the vendor's pages, Help Net Security reported on SecureClaw, Adversa's open-source agent-hardening plugin and skill available on GitHub, and The Register, Help Net Security, and SecurityWeek covered its coding-agent attack research. The cited sources contain no third-party evaluation of the commercial platform itself. [s2, s3, s10, s7, s9, s11] |
| Market Timing Whether the market is ready for this product, with evidence that buyers are actively seeking solutions. | 3/5 | The enabler is AI coding agents that read files, run commands, and load project settings, which Help Net Security and SecurityWeek reporting in May 2026, along with The Register's coverage, shows attackers can abuse. That is one kind of signal, press interest in the threat, and the deployment evidence is the vendor's own, so buyer-side demand stays indirect. [s7, s9, s11, s2, s14] |
| Team Credibility Demonstrated domain expertise with public signals such as prior exits, publications, and industry recognition. | 4/5 | Adversa's about page credits CTO Alex Polyakov with co-inventing the SSRF vulnerability class and co-founding an AI-driven AppSec vendor, and he co-leads the CoSAI agentic AI security workstream. The Register, Help Net Security, and SecurityWeek have covered several separate pieces of the team's AI attack research, from tests on major chatbots to attacks on coding agents, a sustained in-domain publication record rather than one event. [s4, s13, s7, s8, s9, s11] |
| GTM Proof Evidence of actual traction (customers, revenue signals, partnerships) beyond stated intentions. | 2/5 | Adversa describes an unnamed financial institution in production, and it displays a Fortune 500, Big 4, and decacorn trust line without names. Unnamed customers on the vendor's own pages and awards announced through its own wire release sit at the unnamed-customer level. [s1, s2, s3, s20] |
| Funding Efficiency Whether funding matches go-to-market ambition, with signs of capital-efficient growth. | 2/5 | CTech reports Adversa raised approximately $200,000, and Adversa names venture backers such as Foundry and Moxxie Ventures on its about page without an amount, round, or date. CTech dated that figure November 2024, and the cited record does not establish current total funding, so capital cannot be matched to an enterprise sales motion. [s15, s4, s2] |
| Category Clarity Whether the company creates or fits a recognizable category that buyers can quickly place in their stack. | 4/5 | KuppingerCole places Adversa as an AI security company protecting generative and agentic AI through continuous automated red teaming, threat intelligence and runtime guardrails, and its vendor page lists an Innovation Leader badge for Adversa in its Generative AI Defense Leadership Compass. The Register calls Adversa an AI security startup, and Help Net Security describes its open-source SecureClaw agent controls. Analysts and press place it without vendor coaching, while the new coding-agent product line is still explained on Adversa's own pages. [s14, s13, s10, s2] |
| Incumbent Defensibility How vulnerable the core value proposition is to absorption as a feature by a platform vendor. | 3/5 | Palo Alto Networks' Prisma AIRS already bundles AI red teaming and runtime protection, and Check Point agreed to acquire Lakera. Adversa's friction comes from default runtime policies its red team maintains and coverage across several coding-agent brands, which a bundled rival would have to rebuild but which is not a structural moat. [s17, s16, s2] |
Adversa AI now frames its main problem as the actions AI coding agents take inside an enterprise. Adversa says on its homepage that the platform watches what coding agents do and stops damage such as wiped databases, leaked credentials, and malicious code shipping to production. It aims the platform at enterprises deploying coding agents at scale, and the buyer is the security team at such an enterprise.
Independent reporting shows the attacks are real. The Register and Help Net Security covered Adversa's TrustFall research, in which developers could start an attacker-controlled program by accepting Claude Code's folder trust dialog for a cloned repository. Gemini CLI, Cursor CLI, and Copilot CLI were also affected. SecurityWeek covered Adversa's SymJack attack, which Adversa found worked across five major coding agents.
The size of the pain is vendor-framed. The cited pages describe attacks on coding agents. They contain no independent measures of enterprise incident frequency or cost. [s1, s2, s7, s9, s11]
Adversa AI sells two lines. The Coding Agent Security Platform sees every model call, tool execution, and endpoint action an agent takes, links them into chains, and blocks the dangerous ones before they complete. It deploys as a gateway on the agents' own traffic, inline or reading from an existing gateway, plus endpoint sensors on developer machines, and the company says it ships more than 300 default policies its red team maintains.
The second line is AI red teaming for models, applications, agents, and MCP servers. Adversa describes an engine that runs on its own on-prem AI models, a curated attack database built from monitoring more than 3,000 sources monthly, and coverage of more than 60 vulnerability categories. Adversa delivers it as a scoped engagement or a managed service as well as software.
Some of the capability is open to inspection. Help Net Security reported that SecureClaw, Adversa's open-source security plugin and skill for OpenClaw agents, includes 55 audit checks and 15 behavioral rules and is available for free on GitHub. Adversa states that the coding-agent product is in early access with its first production deployments live. [s2, s3, s4, s10]
Adversa AI positions its coding-agent platform against controls that each cover one agent. On its platform page, Adversa argues that Copilot policies and Claude Code enterprise settings govern only their own vendor's agent, while its platform spans Claude Code, Copilot, Cursor, and Codex and the model providers behind them. That cross-vendor claim is the company's own framing.
Palo Alto Networks says Prisma AIRS now combines AI red teaming, runtime protection, and AI agent security. Check Point agreed in September 2025 to acquire Lakera, which it describes as an AI-native security platform for agentic applications.
Adversa's distinct asset is its attack research on coding agents, which outside outlets have covered repeatedly. The company says those findings compile into the platform's default runtime policies, so its policy set comes from the same lab that publishes the attacks. [s2, s17, s16, s3, s7, s11]
Adversa AI's commercial evidence is anonymous and comes from its own pages. On its homepage and platform page, Adversa describes a financial institution that routed Codex, Claude Code, and Copilot through the platform. The financial institution is unnamed.
The company displays a trust line naming Fortune 500, Big 4, and decacorn customers without names, and says it serves banks, insurers, fintech, Big Four, and automotive enterprises. Its RSA Conference 2026 award reached the public through its own PR Newswire release, and Adversa reports on its press-release page the red-teaming platform's inclusion in the OECD catalogue of tools for trustworthy AI.
The motion runs through demos and scoped pilots. Adversa says pilots run 14 to 30 days in observe mode with one development team, with the founding team running a few at a time. Research coverage in The Register, Help Net Security, and SecurityWeek builds awareness ahead of those conversations. [s1, s2, s3, s20, s6, s7, s9, s11]
Adversa AI's founders pair offensive-security depth with AI standards work. Adversa's about page says CTO Alex Polyakov brings twenty years of offensive security experience, co-invented the SSRF vulnerability class, and co-founded an AI-driven AppSec vendor. CEO Daniel Rubinstein is a serial entrepreneur who leads go-to-market, partnerships, and product direction.
The team's research has drawn repeated independent coverage. The Register reported its tests across major chatbots and its Claude Code findings, and Help Net Security and SecurityWeek covered its coding-agent attacks in 2026. That run of work in the company's own domain is the strongest public signal about the team.
Polyakov also takes part in standards bodies. According to the about page, he co-leads the CoSAI agentic AI security workstream, is a core team member of OWASP AIVSS, and serves as Vice Chair of Cyber for an IEEE AI chapter. [s4, s13, s7, s8, s9, s11]
Adversa AI publishes named attestations on its trust center. Adversa lists SOC 2 Type I and SOC 2 Type II as audited and ISO 27001 as certified, and routes buyers to a request form for compliance documents. It also offers on-premises deployment inside air-gapped networks.
The coding-agent platform adds data-handling and failure commitments. Adversa says the design fails open, so a crash or overload never blocks a developer, and that it runs on the customer's infrastructure or in the cloud. [s5, s2, s3]
| Company | Relationship | Note | Compare |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lakera | competes with | Check Point agreed to acquire Lakera, which its acquisition release describes as an AI-native security platform for agentic applications. | |
| HiddenLayer | competes with | ||
| Mindgard | competes with | ||
| Repello AI | competes with | ||
| Noma Security | adjacent | ||
| OpenAI | adjacent | Model provider that could ship native controls for agents built on its platform, removing a third-party budget line. | N/AWe scored these companies at different scopes, so the totals measure different things. |
Add analyzed competitors to compare them side by side with Adversa AI.
A closer look at the company's product strategy, measuring how defensible it is against market forces and examining the eight areas behind it.
press the advantage
Adversa AI owns a granted US patent on combining protection measures for AI applications and a curated attack database built from more than 3,000 sources a month. Its red team also maintains more than 300 default runtime policies. It sells red teaming partly as expert service, so customers buy judgment from its lab as well as software. Its coding-agent platform can sit inline on agent traffic, but the product is in early access with its first production deployments, so that position is new. Adversa holds SOC 2 and ISO 27001 attestations, which a rival can also obtain. Palo Alto Networks already pairs AI red teaming with runtime protection in Prisma AIRS, so a buyer can get both from a security vendor.
| Dimension | Score | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| Value Delivery Does the product sell software as the product, or judgment, trust, or accountability with software as the delivery mechanism. | 2/3 | Adversa sells the coding-agent platform as software and delivers red teaming through scoped lab engagements or a managed service with dedicated experts. Its red team also maintains the platform's default policies, so customers buy both software and expertise. |
| Switching Cost How expensive leaving is for a customer: data portability, integrations, learned workflows, network effects, regulatory data residency. | 2/3 | The platform connects to agent traffic through a gateway, to developer machines through sensors, and to the customer's SIEM through its event stream, and a buyer would have to rebuild these integrations when switching. The switching mechanism is documented, but the cited record does not size what leaving would cost. |
| Compliance Moat Whether certifications, liability acceptance, or audit trails block an easy replacement. | 1/3 | Adversa lists audited SOC 2 Type I and Type II and certified ISO 27001, attestations a funded rival can obtain through ordinary preparation. It maps the platform to obligations such as DORA, but the cited record shows no requirement that only its product could meet. |
| Problem Complexity Whether the product requires ML, optimization, real-time systems, or years of specialized expertise. | 3/3 | Scoring chains of agent actions across model traffic, tools, and endpoints with a 0.2 ms median blocking decision is real-time systems work, and the red-teaming engine generates attacks with its own on-prem AI models across more than 60 vulnerability categories. |
| Buyer Profile Whether buyers are SMB operators, mid-market IT teams, or regulated enterprises and governments with procurement gates. | 3/3 | Adversa builds and sells both lines for regulated enterprises: it maps the coding-agent platform to DORA, offers air-gapped on-premises deployment for classified and regulatory environments, and describes a financial institution running the platform in production. That positioning addresses the regulated-enterprise buyer class. |
| Layer Whether the product is an end-user application, a platform with application features, or infrastructure other applications depend on. | 2/3 | The coding-agent platform can run inline on agent traffic and block action chains before they complete, but Adversa describes it as early access with its first production deployments, and the gateway can instead read from a customer's existing gateway. The red-teaming line tests systems from outside, so the company today is a platform with some application features. |
| Proprietary Data, Content, or IP Whether the product accumulates datasets, content licenses, or IP that a rival cannot recreate from scratch. | 2/3 | Google Patents lists Adversa AI Ltd as the assignee of granted patent US11275841B2 on combining protection measures for AI applications, and the red-teaming engine draws on a curated attack database Adversa builds from monitoring more than 3,000 sources monthly and calls proprietary. These are retained assets a funded rival could replicate with time and effort, not assets shown impossible to recreate. |
Adversa AI aims its lead product at enterprises deploying AI coding agents at scale. The platform covers agents such as Claude Code, Copilot, Cursor, and Codex on developer machines and in code.
The red-teaming line serves a wider set of buyers. Adversa tests models, AI applications, agents, and MCP servers for teams that build their own AI systems, and says it serves banks, insurers, fintech, Big Four, and automotive enterprises. KuppingerCole describes the company as covering continuous automated red teaming, threat intelligence, and runtime guardrails for generative and agentic AI.
Regulated financial buyers are the clearest target in the captured pages. Adversa maps the coding-agent platform to obligations such as DORA, offers air-gapped on-premises deployment for classified and regulatory environments, and describes a financial institution running the platform in production.
The Coding Agent Security Platform watches agent actions at several points and blocks dangerous chains. Adversa says it sees every model call, tool execution, and endpoint action an agent takes, links them into chains, and blocks the dangerous ones before they complete. Adversa reports a median blocking decision of 0.2 ms measured in production.
The red-teaming engine generates attacks rather than replaying a fixed list. Adversa says it runs on its own on-prem AI models, draws on a curated attack database built from monitoring more than 3,000 sources monthly, and covers more than 60 vulnerability categories across models, applications, agents, and MCP servers.
The two lines share one research source. Adversa says the findings its lab produces compile into the platform's default runtime policies, and outlets including SecurityWeek and Help Net Security have covered that lab's coding-agent attack research. Help Net Security reported that SecureClaw, its open-source security plugin and skill for OpenClaw agents, is available for free on GitHub.
Adversa AI sells through demos and scoped pilots run by its founding team. Its homepage describes a 30-minute demo followed by an observe-mode pilot, and its platform page sets pilots at 14 to 30 days with one development team and written success criteria.
Its customer evidence is anonymous and published by the company. Adversa describes a financial institution that routed Codex, Claude Code, and Copilot through the platform. It also displays a trust line naming Fortune 500, Big 4, and decacorn customers without names.
The Register, Help Net Security, and SecurityWeek covered its coding-agent attacks, and its RSA Conference 2026 award reached the public through its own PR Newswire release.
Adversa AI directs buyers to a demo and then a scoped pilot, and the cited pages state no price list or charged unit for either line.
The pilot terms are the clearest commercial detail it publishes. Adversa says pilots run in observe mode with one development team for 14 to 30 days. The buyer and Adversa agree success criteria in advance, including measured overhead and a list of actions the platform would have blocked, before the buyer enables blocking.
Adversa AI delivers the coding-agent platform as software the customer runs on its own infrastructure or in the cloud. It deploys as a gateway on agent traffic, inline or reading from an existing gateway, plus sensors on developer machines, and its SIEM integration takes the event stream.
Red teaming comes in several delivery forms. Adversa offers air-gapped on-premises deployment of the engine, a managed service with dedicated red-team experts, and scoped engagements in which its lab delivers findings ranked by business impact and audit packs mapped to compliance frameworks.
Adversa states the platform design fails open, so a crash or overload never blocks a developer. It also says the coding-agent product is in early access, with pilots run by the founding team a few at a time.
Adversa AI publishes named attestations on its trust center. It lists SOC 2 Type I and SOC 2 Type II as audited and ISO 27001 as certified, and buyers can request compliance documents.
Deployment options carry part of the trust case. Adversa offers its solution on premises inside air-gapped networks, and says the red-teaming engine runs on its own on-prem AI models rather than external providers.
A rival can obtain the same attestations, so they help Adversa through a security review without keeping competitors out. The coding-agent platform maps to obligations such as DORA, but the cited record shows no requirement that only Adversa's product could meet.
Adversa AI positions the coding-agent platform as one layer across agent brands. It says the platform covers Claude Code, Copilot, Cursor, and Codex and the model providers behind them, and argues that each agent vendor's own settings govern only its own agent.
Standards and open-source work extend its reach. Adversa's CTO Alex Polyakov co-leads the CoSAI agentic AI security workstream and is a core team member of OWASP AIVSS, according to the about page. Help Net Security covered SecureClaw as an open-source plugin and skill for OpenClaw agents.
Palo Alto Networks says Prisma AIRS combines AI red teaming, runtime protection, and AI agent security, and Check Point agreed in September 2025 to acquire Lakera.
Adversa AI's founders pair offensive-security depth with AI standards work. The about page says CTO Alex Polyakov brings twenty years of offensive security experience, co-invented the SSRF vulnerability class, and co-founded an AI-driven AppSec vendor, and that CEO Daniel Rubinstein, a serial entrepreneur, leads go-to-market, partnerships, and product direction.
The team's research has drawn repeated independent coverage. The Register reported its tests across major chatbots and its Claude Code findings, and Help Net Security and SecurityWeek covered its coding-agent attacks in 2026.
| Id | Source | Tier | Accessed |
|---|---|---|---|
| f1 | Adversa AI: homepage | official | 2026-10-23 |
| f2 | CTech (Calcalist) RoadShow+ profile stating Adversa AI's 2021 founding | press | 2026-10-23 |
| f3 | The Register: Claude Code deny-rule bypass found by Adversa | press | 2026-10-23 |
| f4 | AI Defense Matrix Catalog entry | other | 2026-06-13 |
| f5 | AI Defense Matrix Catalog mapping | other | 2026-10-23 |
This site is an experimental research aid created by Zeltser Security Corp. All its data gathering and analysis was performed autonomously without human review, and it can contain errors of fact, interpretation, and judgment that a human reviewer might catch.
The analyses are statements of opinion, not statements of fact. Machine analysis produced the scores, summaries, and matrix placements by weighing the public sources each page cites, and reasonable people can weigh the same sources differently. Where a page states a fact, it cites the public source and the date it was checked, and the statement is only as accurate as that source. Unless a profile expressly says otherwise, the analysis involves no hands-on testing and no independent validation of any company's products or services.
Nothing here is professional, security, legal, financial, investment, or purchasing advice, and nothing here is a recommendation to invest in, do business with, or avoid any company. Inclusion of a company is not an endorsement, and absence of a company is not a judgment about it. Reading this site creates no advisory or client relationship. Verify any detail you plan to act on against the vendor's current materials.
The content is provided "as is" and "as available," with all warranties disclaimed, express or implied, including merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, accuracy, and non-infringement. No entry is warranted to be complete, current, or correct. Companies change, vendors update their claims, sources can be wrong, and automated analysis can misread them.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, the operator, Zeltser Security Corp, is not liable for any damages that arise from using this site or relying on its content, including direct, indirect, incidental, special, and consequential damages and lost profits, even if advised that such damages were possible. If you are dissatisfied with the site or disagree with these terms, your remedy is to stop using it.
Entries link to vendor pages, press coverage, and other external sites that Zeltser Security Corp does not control and is not responsible for. A link is not an affiliation with the destination or an endorsement of it. Product and company names and trademarks are the property of their owners, used here nominatively to identify the companies described. Short quotations from cited sources appear for identification and commentary.
Use, quotation, automated retrieval, and redistribution of the content are governed by the Terms of Use at cybercompanyprofiles.com/terms, which permit personal and internal business use with attribution and prohibit republication and resale.