Is Ent or Lasso better for AI endpoint control?

Neither is scored on this site. Ent describes 2 of four product control types and Lasso 3 on the pages we read, and they differ on 11 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?

Ent: Partly. Lasso: Matches. Warn or ask: Ent Matches, Lasso Partly.

Do Ent or Lasso publish prices?

Ent: Not published (demo request). Lasso: Marketplace list price: Lasso for Employees, annual commit for GenAI chatbots, $20,000 for 12 months on AWS Marketplace. Other products: not published.

HEAD-TO-HEAD · FACTS ONLY

Ent vs Lasso: AI endpoint control facts side by side

Short answer

Ent describes 2 of the four product control types on the pages we read and Lasso describes 3; they differ on on-device control, network or SSE proxy and AI or MCP gateway. On decisions, Ent describes some control over tool calls and Lasso 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: Ent
Dashed teal ring: Lasso, 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?

Ent and Lasso Security, from each product's own pages. Differs is computed from recorded statuses, not wording.
Fact	Ent	Lasso
Owner	None	None
Positioning	An intent-aware AI endpoint: one programmable policy for people and AI agents, with interventions from a soft nudge to a hard block, an on-device small language model that classifies sensitive data, and investigation timelines written in plain language. Use cases: insider risk, last-mile threats such as ClickFix, AI usage control and data security.	An AI security platform with discovery and an AI-BOM, posture management, automated red teaming and runtime enforcement at the proxy, API or AI gateway layer, plus usage control through a browser extension and an open-source MCP gateway.
How it reaches devices	A single lightweight agent across Windows, macOS, Linux and modern browsers, run as SaaS or self-hosted in your own cloud; rollout through MDM is not stated. Source: Ent press: intent-aware prevention for AI agents, 30 July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	Several components: a browser extension and proxy integrations for usage control, an open-source MCP gateway, and Claude Code lifecycle hooks set through the enterprise management platform. Source: Lasso Security: AI usage control · Read 27 Sep 2026
On-device controlDiffers	DescribedA single lightweight agent across Windows, macOS and Linux with one programmable policy for people and AI agents. Source: Ent press: intent-aware prevention for AI agents, 30 July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	Partly describedConnects directly to Claude Code's lifecycle hooks via the enterprise management platform and inspects every tool call before it runs; a resident device agent is not described. Source: Lasso Security: AI coding assistants · Read 27 Sep 2026
Browser extension	DescribedBrowser-extension deployments generally available at launch. Source: Ent press: $100M seed, 16 June 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	DescribedAI usage control through a browser extension. Source: Lasso Security: AI usage control · Read 27 Sep 2026
Network or SSE proxyDiffers	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.	DescribedProxy integrations for AI usage control; the page says it works with Palo Alto Networks or CrowdStrike. Source: Lasso Security: AI usage control · Read 27 Sep 2026
AI or MCP gatewayDiffers	Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.	DescribedAn open-source MCP gateway that discovers MCP servers across Claude, Cursor and Windsurf and can block, alert or sanitize. Source: Lasso Security: MCP security · Read 27 Sep 2026
Names the coding agents it covers	MatchesNames OpenAI Codex, Claude Code, Claude Cowork, GitHub Copilot and Cursor. Source: Ent press: intent-aware prevention for AI agents, 30 July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	MatchesClaude Code lifecycle hooks, and MCP discovery across Claude, Cursor and Windsurf. Source: Lasso Security: AI coding assistants · Read 27 Sep 2026
Decides on a tool call before it runsDiffers	PartlyBlocks risky agent behavior where needed; per-tool-call mechanics are not described. Source: Ent press: intent-aware prevention for AI agents, 30 July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	MatchesInspects every Claude Code tool call before it is executed. Source: Lasso Security: AI coding assistants · Read 27 Sep 2026
Controls what goes into browser AIDiffers	PartlyClassifies sensitive data at the point of use on the device and in browsers; prompt-level controls are not detailed. Source: Ent press: intent-aware prevention for AI agents, 30 July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	MatchesUsage control through a browser extension. Source: Lasso Security: AI usage control · Read 27 Sep 2026
Rolls out through EDR or device management you runDiffers	Not in our sources	PartlyClaude Code hooks are set through the enterprise management platform; the other components are a browser extension, a proxy and a gateway. Source: Lasso Security: AI coding assistants · Read 27 Sep 2026
Can warn or ask instead of only blockingDiffers	MatchesInterventions range from a soft nudge to a hard block. Source: Ent homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026	PartlyAlert is an action; asking the user is not described. Source: Lasso Security: MCP security · Read 27 Sep 2026
Can block an agent, tool or action	MatchesA hard block is one of its interventions. Source: Ent homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026	MatchesBlock, alert or sanitize on MCP traffic. Source: Lasso Security: MCP security · Read 27 Sep 2026
Has a watch-only or simulation modeDiffers	Not in our sources	PartlyAlert without blocking. Source: Lasso Security: MCP security · Read 27 Sep 2026
Records who or what took each actionDiffers	MatchesNatural-language investigation timelines. Source: Ent press: intent-aware prevention for AI agents, 30 July 2026 · Read 13 Oct 2026	PartlyAudit-ready reports. Source: Lasso Security: AI usage control · Read 27 Sep 2026
Also covers SaaS, cloud or homegrown AIDiffers	Not in our sources	MatchesDiscovery and AI-BOM, posture management, red teaming and runtime enforcement for AI apps. Source: Lasso Security homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026
Has a public price or tiers (vendor site or marketplace)Differs	Not in our sources	PartlyAWS Marketplace lists Lasso for Employees with an annual commit for GenAI chatbots at $20,000 for 12 months (marketplace list price); prices for its other products are not listed there. Source: AWS Marketplace: Lasso for Employees · Read 11 Oct 2026
Built into	None	None
Works with	None in our sources	The usage control page says it works with Palo Alto Networks. The usage control page says it works with CrowdStrike. Offers proxy integrations for AI usage control. Source: Lasso Security: AI usage control · Read 27 Sep 2026
Price	Not published (demo request). Source: Ent homepage · Read 13 Oct 2026	Marketplace list price: Lasso for Employees, annual commit for GenAI chatbots, $20,000 for 12 months on AWS Marketplace. Other products: not published. Source: AWS Marketplace: Lasso for Employees · Read 11 Oct 2026

Where do they differ?

On-device control: Ent describes it; Lasso partly describes it.
Network or SSE proxy: Ent is not in our sources; Lasso describes it.
AI or MCP gateway: Ent is not in our sources; Lasso describes it.
Decides on a tool call before it runs: Ent partly matches; Lasso matches.
Controls what goes into browser AI: Ent partly matches; Lasso matches.
Rolls out through EDR or device management you run: Ent is not in our sources; Lasso partly matches.
Can warn or ask instead of only blocking: Ent matches; Lasso partly matches.
Has a watch-only or simulation mode: Ent is not in our sources; Lasso partly matches.
Records who or what took each action: Ent matches; Lasso partly matches.
Also covers SaaS, cloud or homegrown AI: Ent is not in our sources; Lasso matches.
Has a public price or tiers (vendor site or marketplace): Ent is not in our sources; Lasso partly matches.

Choose Ent if

You want one policy for people and AI agents, with nudges as well as blocks
You need device and browser coverage from one agent

Choose Lasso if

You want controls in several places at once: browser, proxy, MCP gateway and coding agent hooks
You prefer an open-source MCP gateway you can inspect

Which limits should you check?

Ent

Per-tool-call mechanics and rollout through MDM are not described on the pages we read.
Uses its own agent, and no price is published.

Lasso

Several components to deploy and run.
Asking the user before an action is not described, and the only public price covers its chatbot product on AWS Marketplace.

Line up Ent and Lasso with others Run the finder