They can refuse an agent action too. Few others can.
Endor Labs moved from reachability-based SCA to an agentic AppSec platform, and AURI checks each agent action against policy before it runs. This page starts by granting that, then says exactly where the two products separate.
What Endor Labs does well
Reachability-based SCA that is among the sharpest in the market, AI SAST that looks for IDOR, broken access control and insecure design, secrets detection, a package firewall, container reachability, an inventory of the agents, models and MCP servers in use, and AURI, which blocks, alerts on or asks before an agent action runs and logs every event.
But:
IaC coverage comes from AI SAST on Terraform rather than a dedicated IaC scanner. Endor scans agent files such as SKILL.md, AGENT.md and CLAUDE.md for unsafe commands, secrets and risky installs, but does not document detecting injected instructions in them. Its logic analysis finds flaws such as IDOR, not breaches of the business rules you wrote. If its governance hooks cannot run or reach the policy service, agent actions proceed. EU customers get a dedicated tenant on Azure in the EU region.
CybeDefend vs Endor Labs
| Feature | CybeDefend | Endor Labs |
|---|---|---|
Detection× 10 | ||
| Agent-time scanning | ✓ | ✓ |
| SAST | ✓ | ✓ |
| SCA | ✓ | ✓ |
| IaC scanning | ✓ | ~ |
| Container scanning | ✓ | ✓ |
| Secret detection | ✓ | ✓ |
| Business logic flaws | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reachability analysis | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI-BOM: AI component inventory (EU AI Act + NIST AI RMF) | ✓ | ✓ |
| Prompt injection & LLM-misuse scanner (OWASP LLM Top 10) | ✓ | ~ |
AI & Agent× 7 | ||
| Agent-time (Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf…) | ✓ | ✓ |
| IDE security copilot | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI-generated verified patches | ✓ | ✓ |
| Auto-fix → ready-to-merge PR | ✓ | ✓ |
| Security Code Knowledge Graph | ✓ | ✓ |
| VibeDefend: security rules distributed to AI coding agents | ✓ | ✗ |
| Coding agent sandbox policy (allow/deny/warn before every write) | ✓ | ✓ |
Operations× 5 | ||
| CI/CD pipeline gate | ✓ | ✓ |
| Low false-positive rate | ✓ | ✓ |
| Setup under 5 minutes | ✓ | ✓ |
| CybeRisk Score: 0-100 score + AI-generated weekly Top 10 brief | ✓ | ✗ |
| EU/US sovereign deployment | ✓ | ~ |
✓ = Yes - ✗ = No - ~ = Partial
Agent actions: a row we share
Declining an agent's command is new in application security. Endor Labs does it today, Snyk offers it in open preview, and so do we. If action governance is the only thing you need, evaluate the options and pick on integration fit rather than on marketing. The distinction worth testing is scope: ask each product what happens when the agent runs a destructive database command mid-session, when it reads a credentials file it was never asked to open, and when the policy service cannot be reached.
Security logic is not business logic
Endor Labs' AI SAST looks for IDOR, broken access control, insecure design and fail-open authentication, and its pull request reviews flag architectural risk such as an endpoint shipped without authentication or a removed OAuth state parameter. That is real and valuable, and it is security logic. Nothing it announces answers whether your employee discount applies after commercial promotions rather than before, or whether a refund is computed on what the item actually bore. Those rules have no CWE, no signature and no benchmark row, and they are the ones that cost money quietly.
What you can check before you sign
Both products install in minutes and both have a free entry point, so the comparison does not have to be theoretical. Run the same repository through each. Count what survives triage, ask each one about one business rule your codebase enforces, and price both at twice your current headcount. Our plans are published on our site; Endor Labs lists no prices on its own site, and its AWS Marketplace listing shows 10-seat packs at $7,200 a year for Code Pro and $12,960 for Open Source Pro.
Both products sit inside the agent loop. The difference is what they check against. Endor Labs checks your code against vulnerability classes and your actions against a policy. CybeDefend does that and checks the code against your own written business rules, the ones that have no CWE and never appear in a benchmark.
Pricing at a glance
Transparent pricing is a core CybeDefend value. See how we compare.
CybeDefend
- Developer€204/year
- Team · 5-10 users€2,148/year - €3,348/year
- Scale · 15-25 users€6,588/year - €8,988/year
- EnterpriseContact sales
Endor Labs
- DeveloperFree
- Code Pro · 10 users$7,200/year
- Open Source Pro · 10 users$12,960/year
Competitor prices: the lowest annual list price published for the plan shown, taken from the vendor's website or its own marketplace listing and checked in September 2026. Always verify before purchasing.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Endor Labs a real alternative to CybeDefend?
Yes, and it is the closest one. Endor Labs already checks agent actions against a policy before they execute, and Snyk offers the same kind of control in open preview. If your requirement stops at action governance and dependency reachability, Endor Labs is a serious choice and you should evaluate both.
What does CybeDefend do that Endor Labs does not?
Conformance to your own written business rules, dedicated infrastructure-as-code scanning, analysis of agent instruction files for injected instructions, the CybeRisk Score, and EU hosting on Scaleway, a European provider.
Who has the better reachability analysis?
Endor Labs built its reputation on reachability and it remains among the sharpest in the market. We include reachability and prioritise on it, but if dependency reachability is the single capability you are buying, they earned that ground first and we say so.
Install VibeDefend in 5 seconds.
One command wires every coding agent on your machine to CybeDefend: your business rules, your compliance frameworks, and guards that block destructive calls before they fire.
npx -y @cybedefend/vibedefend@latest install
Claude Code
Cursor
OpenAI Codex
Windsurf
VS Code Copilot