In the burgeoning field of artificial intelligence, the integration of AI agents into enterprise workflows presents both immense opportunities and significant security challenges. Maxim Bar Kogan, Founder & CEO of Onyx Security, sat down with Sarah Guo, host of the No Priors podcast, to discuss the critical need for robust security measures when deploying AI agents.
Who is Onyx Security?
Onyx Security, founded by Maxim Bar Kogan and headquartered in New York, is building what it calls an AI Guardian: a control layer that sits between autonomous AI agents and the enterprise systems they act on, enforcing identity, scope, and data-access policies at runtime. The thesis is that as agents start initiating writes, payments, and code changes on their own behalf, existing IAM, DLP, and CASB tools do not recognize them as humans or as services, which leaves a governance gap that today's security stack does not cleanly fill.
The competitive landscape
Onyx is one of nearly twenty venture-backed startups working in the broader AI security category. The cohort below is grouped by stage; the funding figures are totals to date and the descriptions are intentionally factual rather than promotional. Most of these companies are selling into the same enterprise security buyer, with overlapping wedges around model security, agent governance, runtime defense, and AI compliance.
Series B and later
- Noma Security (Series B, $132M raised) — Protects the data and AI lifecycle from model build through production runtime. nomasec.com
- Zenity (Series B, $71.5M raised) — Security and governance for low-code/no-code AI agents and Copilot extensions inside enterprises. zenity.io
- Robust Intelligence (Series C, $64M raised; acquired by Cisco) — Real-time AI firewall and automated model testing. robustintelligence.com
- Patronus AI (Series B, $14.5M raised) — Independent evaluation and safety scoring for production LLM applications. patronus.ai
Series A
- Protect AI (Series A, $105M raised) — MLSecOps for the ML/AI supply chain, with visibility into model artifacts, dependencies, and runtime behavior. protectai.com
- WitnessAI ($85.5M raised) — Observability and policy enforcement across enterprise AI traffic, agents, and LLM interactions. witness.ai
- HiddenLayer (Series A, $56M raised) — Detection and response for adversarial attacks against deployed ML models. hiddenlayer.com
- Prompt Security (Series A, $35M raised) — Inline protection for enterprise generative AI usage, covering prompt-injection defense and outbound data-leakage controls. prompt.security
- Aim Security (Series A, $28M raised) — Guardrails for sanctioned and shadow generative-AI use across the enterprise. hakasecurity.com
- Cranium (Series A, $25M raised) — AI governance and compliance platform built around an AI bill of materials. cranium.com
- Knostic (Series A, $14.3M raised) — Need-to-know access controls for generative AI, aimed at preventing LLM oversharing in Copilot and RAG deployments. knostic.ai
Seed stage
- CalypsoAI (Seed, $15M raised) — Red-teaming and guardrail enforcement for LLM deployments. calypso.ai
- Lakera (Seed, $12M raised) — Lakera Guard, a prompt-injection and content-safety API for GenAI applications. lakera.ai
- Pillar Security (Seed, $10.5M raised) — AI security platform covering discovery, posture management, and runtime protection. akod.ai
- DeepKeep (Seed, $10M raised) — Generative-AI risk assessment and runtime defense. deepkeep.ai
- Apex Security (Seed, $7M raised) — Enterprise security platform for safe AI adoption. apexhq.ai
- Lasso Security (Seed, $6M raised) — LLM cybersecurity across enterprise touchpoints where models meet business data. lasso.security
- Operant AI (Seed, $5M raised) — Runtime security for AI and agents inside inference infrastructure, with a Kubernetes-native focus. operant.ai
The structural question hanging over the category
The question worth naming, and one that applies to every company on the list above (Onyx included), is whether the model developers themselves will absorb most of this functionality over time. Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google ship the models the rest of the stack depends on, and each is steadily adding native guardrails, evaluation suites, and agent governance to their enterprise tiers. A founder building Claude- or GPT-shaped controls today has to assume the model provider can ship the same capability as a standard feature in a future SDK update.
This is also visible to anyone using a tool like Claude Code in production: ask the model to audit an operation, generate guardrails, write threat models, and harden an inference pipeline, and the artifact you get back is competent and effectively free at the margin. Multiplied across every engineering team, that pattern puts steady pressure on the "we secure the LLM" wedge.
