Manifold Security
commercialThe section your link pointed to isn't on Manifold Security's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Manifold Security is an AI detection and response platform that monitors what autonomous AI agents do at runtime on enterprise endpoints and blocks risky actions.
Summary
Manifold Security is a commercial AI detection and response platform that governs coding agents through a policy engine with four responses: Allow, Deny, Alert, and Ask, the last halting an agent mid-task until a developer approves or rejects it, treating silence as rejection. It deploys agentlessly on enterprise endpoints, and because agents differ in how they surface prompts, Manifold uses a two-path delivery model: tools like Claude Code, Cursor, and Gemini CLI get inline prompts through their own permission systems, while Codex, Devin, and Kimi get a native OS consent dialog instead. The Alert mode lets a new rule run in observation first, logging hits centrally so teams can tune thresholds before enforcing Ask or Deny. It is built for security teams overseeing developers who run autonomous coding agents, positioning itself as the missing runtime layer EDREDREndpoint detection and response, monitoring computers for suspicious behavior and providing investigation and response controls, such as isolating a device. was never built to cover. Manifold launched in 2025.
Manifold Security is an AI detection and response platform that monitors what autonomous AI agents do at runtime on enterprise endpoints and blocks risky actions.
How Manifold Security helps
Which autonomous agents running on this endpoint are taking actions right now?
watches agent activity at runtime on the endpoint and reports what each agent is doing as it happens, rather than after the fact
Which agent action would have been blocked if it had gone one step further?
evaluates each risky action against the platform's runtime rules and stops it before it executes, naming the action and the rule it tripped
Did an agent on this machine try something it had no business doing?
flags actions classified as risky as they occur on the endpoint and records them for later review
Which endpoints have agents that behaved differently from what the team expects?
monitors agent behavior across enterprise endpoints so a machine whose agent is taking unapproved actions stands out from the rest
Languages
Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
Five scores for Manifold Security, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail Manifold Security puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
2 entries
No entries match these filters.
- October 20261
- September 20261
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.
Choose a badge style and copy the code →