Skip to content
Endpoint AI Finder

HEAD-TO-HEAD · FACTS ONLY

Bay vs Noma: AI endpoint control facts side by side

Short answer

Bay describes 1 of the four product control types on the pages we read and Noma describes 1 and their control positions match. On decisions, Bay decides on a tool call before it runs and Noma describes some control over tool calls. 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?

Bay: described at 1 of 4 product control positions (on-device control).AI servicesMCP serversDEVOn-device controlBRWBrowser extensionNETNetwork or SSE proxyGWYAI or MCP gatewayPOLPolicy: no product
  • Filled or hatched marker: Bay
  • Dashed teal ring: Noma, 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?

Bay and Noma Security, from each product's own pages. Differs is computed from recorded statuses, not wording.
FactBayNoma
OwnerNoneNone
PositioningAn endpoint-first control layer for AI agents, coding assistants and MCP servers on employee devices. Bay describes itself as a fully preventive, agentless platform that classifies, governs and prevents risks across every AI agent and tool on enterprise endpoints.An AI security platform with AI-SPM, Agent Access Control, AI detection and response and AI red teaming, covering agents on endpoints, in SaaS and in homegrown apps.
How it reaches devicesDeploys through your existing EDR or MDM, with no new agents and no new tools; Bay says it scans in minutes and exits cleanly.

Source: Bay homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

Discovers endpoint agents through your existing EDR or MDM, with no new endpoint agent to deploy.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

On-device controlDescribedInventories AI agents, MCP servers, tools, credentials and extensions on the device, and its Enforcer returns Allow, Ask or Deny locally on prompts, pre-tool calls and post-tool responses on supported agent surfaces. Delivered as Wave, an ephemeral binary that runs through your existing MDM or EDR. Policies can be scoped by agent, group, endpoint or device.

Source: Bay blog: Ghostjacking (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

DescribedDiscovers endpoint agents such as Claude Code, Cursor and Codex with their MCP servers and skills, blocks unauthorized and malicious ones, and inspects activity at runtime.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

Browser extensionNot in our sourcesNo browser extension is described. Bay's Application Control can allow or block browsers and extensions as applications, which is a device rule, not a control on what goes into browser AI.

Source: Bay blog: Ghostjacking (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.
Network or SSE proxyNot in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.
AI or MCP gatewayNot in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.Not in our sourcesNot described on the pages we read.
Names the coding agents it coversMatchesManaged settings for Claude Code, Codex and Claude Desktop lock permission rules, preserve managed hooks, restrict MCP servers and constrain plugin sources.

Source: Bay blog: Ghostjacking, an AI agent attack (August 2026) · Read 27 Sep 2026

MatchesNames Claude Code, Cursor and Codex.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

Decides on a tool call before it runsDiffersMatchesEvaluates prompts, pre-tool calls and post-tool responses and returns Allow, Ask or Deny locally, which Bay states takes under 4ms with no cloud round-trip, on supported agent surfaces.

Source: Bay blog: Ghostjacking (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

PartlyRuntime inspection of the event, the session, the identity behind the agent and the data it reaches; decisions on individual tool calls are described less specifically.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

Controls what goes into browser AINot in our sourcesNot in our sources
Rolls out through EDR or device management you runMatchesDeploys through your existing EDR or MDM; no new agents.

Source: Bay homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

MatchesThrough your existing EDR or MDM, with no new endpoint agent.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

Can warn or ask instead of only blockingDiffersMatchesAsk is one of three answers, with Allow and Deny.

Source: Bay homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

PartlyStates that runtime decisions can route to a human.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents (re-read) · Read 13 Oct 2026

Can block an agent, tool or actionMatchesDeny stops an action. Rules cover MCP servers (an allow or block list, and per-tool rules for read, create, update, delete and execute), applications, CLIs, browsers, IDEs and extensions, credentials and files, network egress allow lists, and capability rules such as shell execution, package installation and cloud CLIs.

Source: Bay blog: Ghostjacking (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

MatchesBlocks unauthorized and malicious agents.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

Has a watch-only or simulation modeDiffersMatchesSimulation Mode runs a rule without enforcing it.

Source: Bay blog: Ghostjacking, an AI agent attack (August 2026) · Read 27 Sep 2026

Not in our sources
Records who or what took each actionDiffersMatchesRecords who triggered an action, whether a human was involved, and the chain from prompt to system action.

Source: Bay homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

PartlyKeeps a live registry of allowed agents, MCP servers and skills and inspects the identity behind each agent.

Source: Noma Security: endpoint agents · Read 27 Sep 2026

Also covers SaaS, cloud or homegrown AIDiffersNot in our sourcesMatchesCovers endpoint, SaaS and homegrown agents.

Source: Noma Security homepage · Read 27 Sep 2026

Has a public price or tiers (vendor site or marketplace)DiffersNot in our sourcesMatchesAWS Marketplace lists the Noma Security Platform at $200,000 for a 12-month contract (marketplace list price); noma.security has no pricing page.

Source: AWS Marketplace: Noma Security Platform · Read 11 Oct 2026

Built intoNoneNone
Works withNone in our sourcesNone in our sources
PriceNot published. Bay's site has a demo request and no pricing page (re-checked 11 October 2026).

Source: Bay homepage (re-read) · Read 11 Oct 2026

Marketplace list price: $200,000 for a 12-month contract on AWS Marketplace. No pricing page on noma.security.

Source: AWS Marketplace: Noma Security Platform · Read 11 Oct 2026

Where do they differ?

  • Decides on a tool call before it runs: Bay matches; Noma partly matches.
  • Can warn or ask instead of only blocking: Bay matches; Noma partly matches.
  • Has a watch-only or simulation mode: Bay matches; Noma is not in our sources.
  • Records who or what took each action: Bay matches; Noma partly matches.
  • Also covers SaaS, cloud or homegrown AI: Bay is not in our sources; Noma matches.
  • Has a public price or tiers (vendor site or marketplace): Bay is not in our sources; Noma matches.

Choose Bay if

  • Your developers run coding agents with many MCP servers and you want a decision on each action before it runs
  • You want to add AI agent control through the EDR or MDM you already run instead of rolling out another agent

Choose Noma if

  • Agents run on laptops, in SaaS and in apps you build, and you want one place to see them
  • You want discovery through existing EDR or MDM without a new agent

Which limits should you check?

Bay

  • Endpoint only: no browser extension, network proxy or AI gateway is described, and nothing on SaaS or cloud-hosted AI apps.
  • One of the smallest public footprints here: a single homepage, two blog posts, no documentation portal and no published pricing (re-checked 11 October 2026).
  • Headline figures such as under 5 minutes to deploy, under 1% false positives and 100% of shadow AI discovered are Bay's own statements and have not been verified.

Noma

  • A watch-only or simulation mode is not described on the pages we read.
  • Decisions on individual tool calls are described less specifically than discovery, and the only public price is a $200,000 a year marketplace listing.

Questions people ask

Is Bay or Noma better for AI endpoint control?

Neither is scored on this site. Bay describes 1 of four product control types and Noma 1 on the pages we read, and they differ on 6 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?

Bay: Matches. Noma: Partly. Warn or ask: Bay Matches, Noma Partly.

Do Bay or Noma publish prices?

Bay: Not published. Bay's site has a demo request and no pricing page (re-checked 11 October 2026). Noma: Marketplace list price: $200,000 for a 12-month contract on AWS Marketplace. No pricing page on noma.security.