Head to head · Checked against vendor sites, September 2026
Noma Security vs Lasso Security: AI agent security compared
The verdict
Noma Security scores higher overall on our weights (7.5 vs 6.6 out of 10). Noma Security scores higher on visibility, footprint, identity and audit, maturity and breadth; Lasso Security scores higher on tool-call control. They tie on policy. Neither publishes list prices.
How do Noma Security and Lasso Security compare on each criterion?
| Criterion | Weight | Noma Security | Lasso Security | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visibility | 22% | 8 | 6 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Discovers endpoint agents such as Claude Code, Cursor and Codex with their MCP servers and skills. Lasso Security: Discovers MCP servers across Claude, Cursor and Windsurf and AI tool use; device-level inventory is not detailed. | ||||
| Tool-call control | 20% | 7 | 8 | Lasso Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Blocks unauthorized and malicious agents and stops risky behavior at runtime; per-tool-call mechanics are described less specifically. Lasso Security: Inspects every tool call before it is executed through Claude Code lifecycle hooks; open-source MCP gateway with block, alert or sanitize. | ||||
| Policy | 15% | 7 | 7 | Tie |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Runtime inspection across the event, the session, the identity behind the agent and the data it reaches; action types beyond block not detailed. Lasso Security: Intent-aware policies, role-based permissions and DLP with masking. | ||||
| Identity and audit | 12% | 7 | 5 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Keeps a live registry of allowed agents, MCP servers and skills and inspects the identity behind each agent. Lasso Security: Detailed audit history of inputs and decisions; agent vs human attribution not described. | ||||
| Footprint | 13% | 8 | 6 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Discovers endpoint agents through existing EDR or MDM with no new endpoint agent to deploy. Lasso Security: Browser extension, proxy, gateway and Claude Code enterprise hooks; several components to run. | ||||
| Breadth | 8% | 9 | 8 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: Covers endpoint, SaaS and homegrown agents, plus AI-SPM and AI red teaming. Lasso Security: AI apps, agents, red teaming and usage control. | ||||
| Maturity | 10% | 7 | 6 | Noma Security |
Why these scoresNoma Security: SOC 2, ISO 27001, ISO 9001 and HIPAA listed; Gartner recognition cited by the vendor; pricing not published. Lasso Security: Pricing and company backing not published on the pages we reviewed. | ||||
| Total | 100% | 7.5 | 6.6 | Noma Security |
How do they deploy, and what do they cost?
| Attribute | Noma Security | Lasso Security |
|---|---|---|
| Owner | Not acquired | Not acquired |
| How it reaches devices | Through existing EDR or MDM | Browser extension, proxy, gateway, Claude Code hooks |
| Deployment detail | Noma states that it discovers agents, MCP servers and skills on employee endpoints through your existing EDR or MDM, with no new endpoint agent to deploy. SaaS and homegrown agent coverage connects through the platforms and environments where those agents run. | Lasso offers a browser extension, proxy integrations, its MCP gateway and Claude Code hook integration, and says it works with existing stacks such as Palo Alto Networks or CrowdStrike. |
| Pricing | Contact sales. Noma Security does not publish pricing. | Contact sales. Pricing is not published. |
Source: noma.security · Noma endpoint agents · Noma platform · lasso.security · Lasso MCP security · Lasso AI coding assistants · Lasso AI usage control · Reviewed Sep 2026
Which should you choose?
Choose Noma Security if
- Your priority matches our designation for Noma Security: best for endpoint plus SaaS and homegrown agents.
- You need a fleet-wide inventory of AI agents, MCP servers, extensions and credentials on devices: Noma Security scores 8 to 6.
- You want a light rollout with published deployment detail, ideally through existing EDR or MDM: Noma Security scores 8 to 6.
Choose Lasso Security if
- Your priority matches our designation for Lasso Security: best for MCP gateway and Claude Code hooks.
- You need to evaluate or stop individual tool calls before they run: Lasso Security scores 8 to 7.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better, Noma Security or Lasso Security?
Noma Security scores higher overall on our weights (7.5 vs 6.6 out of 10). Noma Security scores higher on visibility, footprint, identity and audit, maturity and breadth; Lasso Security scores higher on tool-call control. They tie on policy. Scores are editorial assessments from public vendor material, reviewed September 2026.
Do Noma Security and Lasso Security publish prices?
No. Neither publishes list prices, so ask both for a quote.
Do Noma Security or Lasso Security replace EDR?
No. The tools in this guide add control over AI agent actions and work alongside EDR. Noma Security: Through existing EDR or MDM. Lasso Security: Browser extension, proxy, gateway, Claude Code hooks.
Related
Sources
- noma.security · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Noma endpoint agents · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Noma platform · Reviewed Sep 2026
- lasso.security · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Lasso MCP security · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Lasso AI coding assistants · Reviewed Sep 2026
- Lasso AI usage control · Reviewed Sep 2026