Is AI Access Security or Neo better for AI endpoint control?

Neither is scored on this site. AI Access Security describes 1 of four product control types and Neo 1 on the pages we read, and they differ on 12 recorded facts. Which fits depends on the AI tools people use, your devices, where the work happens and whether you block or guide; the finder checks those.

Which of the two decides on a tool call before it runs?

AI Access Security: Not in our sources. Neo: Matches. Warn or ask: AI Access Security Not in our sources, Neo Matches.

Do AI Access Security or Neo publish prices?

AI Access Security: Not published. Neo: Not published (demo request).

HEAD-TO-HEAD · FACTS ONLY

AI Access Security vs Neo: AI endpoint control facts side by side

Short answer

AI Access Security describes 1 of the four product control types on the pages we read and Neo describes 1; they differ on on-device control, browser extension and network or SSE proxy. On decisions, AI Access Security does not describe tool-call decisions on the pages we read and Neo decides on a tool call before it runs. We do not score either; the right choice depends on the AI tools people use, your devices, your current stack and whether you block or guide.

By The Device Desk · Endpoint AI Finder · Published 2026-10-11

Desk research from public vendor pages read on 27 September and 11 October 2026. Profiles follow our published method; we did not run the products.

Vendor pages read September and October 2026 · updated 2026-10-13

Where do their controls sit?

Filled or hatched marker: AI Access Security
Dashed teal ring: Neo, described

DEV Filled marker: described on the product pages we read
DEV Hatched marker: partly described (another component, a narrower scope, or method not detailed)
DEV Dashed marker: not in our sources (it may exist; we did not find it)

The map shows where each product's own pages describe a control, or where your answers point. It is not a measure of how well a product works.

What are the facts, side by side?

AI Access Security (Palo Alto Networks) and Neo, from each product's own pages. Differs is computed from recorded statuses, not wording.
Fact	AI Access Security	Neo
Owner	None	None
Positioning	Palo Alto Networks' control for employee use of GenAI apps, linked from its Prisma Access and SASE pages: visibility into shadow AI across 4,000+ GenAI applications, control over their use, and protection against sensitive data loss and malicious responses.	Agentic Software Control from Neo Security, Inc. (neo.ai, not Pulumi Neo): a live inventory of agents, models, skills, MCP servers and extensions on every endpoint, and runtime control that intercepts agent actions and allows, blocks or holds them for approval. Launched 20 July 2026 with $100M from Andreessen Horowitz and Bessemer; HQ Boston.
How it reaches devices	Part of Palo Alto Networks' SASE offering, linked from Prisma Access; the page does not describe an endpoint component. Source: Palo Alto Networks: AI Access Security · Read 11 Oct 2026	A lightweight endpoint sensor with no kernel module, no reboot and no OS hooks; analysis stays on the device. OS support is not listed on the pages we read; SACR (secondary) says it needs no MDM. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
On-device controlDiffers	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.	DescribedA live inventory of agents, models, skills, MCP servers and extensions on every endpoint, with runtime control that intercepts agent actions. Source: Neo homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026
Browser extensionDiffers	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.	Partly described(secondary: SACR) user-mode endpoint and browser security. Source: SACR (secondary): CISO guide to endpoint control and prevention, July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026 · secondary source
Network or SSE proxyDiffers	DescribedVisibility into shadow AI across 4,000+ GenAI applications, control, and protection against sensitive data loss, delivered with Palo Alto Networks' SASE. Source: Palo Alto Networks: AI Access Security · Read 11 Oct 2026	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.
AI or MCP gateway	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.
Names the coding agents it coversDiffers	Not in our sources	MatchesNames Claude Code, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenAI Codex; Cursor is not named. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
Decides on a tool call before it runsDiffers	Not in our sources	MatchesIntercepts agent actions at the endpoint and allows, blocks or holds them for approval. Source: Neo homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026
Controls what goes into browser AIDiffers	PartlyPrevents sensitive data loss in GenAI apps; prompt-level controls are not detailed on the page. Source: Palo Alto Networks: AI Access Security · Read 11 Oct 2026	Not in our sources
Rolls out through EDR or device management you runDiffers	Not in our sources	PartlyIts own lightweight sensor rather than a rollout through existing EDR or MDM. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
Can warn or ask instead of only blockingDiffers	Not in our sources	MatchesHold an action for verified human approval. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
Can block an agent, tool or actionDiffers	PartlyControl over GenAI app use is listed; the actions available are not detailed. Source: Palo Alto Networks: AI Access Security · Read 11 Oct 2026	MatchesBlock is one of its runtime actions. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
Has a watch-only or simulation modeDiffers	Not in our sources	MatchesAudit mode before enforcement. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
Records who or what took each actionDiffers	Not in our sources	MatchesEvery action tied to the human or agent that caused it, in an immutable audit chain. Source: Neo homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026
Also covers SaaS, cloud or homegrown AIDiffers	Not in our sources	PartlyNames SaaS and desktop AI such as Slack AI, Notion AI, Salesforce Agentforce and ChatGPT Desktop. Source: Neo: platform · Read 13 Oct 2026
Has a public price or tiers (vendor site or marketplace)	Not in our sources	Not in our sources
Built into	None	None
Works with	Part of Palo Alto Networks' SASE offering, linked from Prisma Access. Source: Palo Alto Networks: AI Access Security · Read 11 Oct 2026	None in our sources
Price	Not published. Source: Palo Alto Networks: AI Access Security · Read 11 Oct 2026	Not published (demo request). Source: Neo homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026

Where do they differ?

On-device control: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo describes it.
Browser extension: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo partly describes it.
Network or SSE proxy: AI Access Security describes it; Neo is not in our sources.
Names the coding agents it covers: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo matches.
Decides on a tool call before it runs: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo matches.
Controls what goes into browser AI: AI Access Security partly matches; Neo is not in our sources.
Rolls out through EDR or device management you run: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo partly matches.
Can warn or ask instead of only blocking: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo matches.
Can block an agent, tool or action: AI Access Security partly matches; Neo matches.
Has a watch-only or simulation mode: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo matches.
Records who or what took each action: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo matches.
Also covers SaaS, cloud or homegrown AI: AI Access Security is not in our sources; Neo partly matches.

Choose AI Access Security if

You already run Palo Alto Networks Prisma Access and want GenAI app controls in the same place
Your main concern is employees using many GenAI web apps rather than agents on laptops

Choose Neo if

You want to hold agent actions for human approval on the device
You want an audit mode before enforcing rules

Which limits should you check?