SentriAI vs Noma Security
Noma Security secures the AI and agent lifecycle. SentriAI governs the agent action at runtime. Here is the honest comparison.
TL;DR verdict
Noma Security is an AI security platform that protects the AI and data lifecycle, from development through agents in production. SentriAI is an AI Action Governance platform: it decides, per action and at runtime, whether an actor should be allowed to do a thing to a resource - and records the verdict as tamper-evident evidence. These solve different problems, and for most teams they are complementary rather than either-or.
What Noma Security does well
- Coverage across the AI/ML and data lifecycle
- Detection of risks in data pipelines, models, and agents
- Runtime monitoring of AI and agentic systems
- A broad platform view of AI security posture
Where SentriAI differs
Noma Security spans the AI lifecycle broadly - data, models, and agents. SentriAI is deliberately focused on one primitive done deeply: the per-action decision. Where a lifecycle platform monitors and detects across many phases, SentriAI returns a deterministic verdict and an Action Trust Score for each action and records it as tamper-evident, control-mapped evidence. Breadth and depth that complement each other.
What SentriAI adds that this category does not
- A per-action Policy Decision Point that returns allow, step-up, review, contain, or deny
- An Action Trust Score (0–100) with the explainable factors behind it
- A hash-chained, reproducible trust ledger for every decision
- Governed actions that map themselves to SOC 2 CC6/CC7 and other controls
Side-by-side
| Dimension | SentriAI | Noma Security |
|---|---|---|
| Primary job | Decide the agent action | Secure the AI/data lifecycle |
| Scope | Deep on the per-action decision | Broad across the lifecycle |
| Runtime enforcement | Yes - per-action verdicts | Monitoring and detection |
| Evidence model | Hash-chained governed-action evidence | Security findings across phases |
| Compliance mapping | Actions map to SOC 2 CC6/CC7 | Posture and detection |
| Best fit | Runtime action governance | Lifecycle AI security |
Who should pick which
Frequently asked questions
Is SentriAI a Noma Security alternative?
They differ in breadth versus depth. Noma covers the AI and data lifecycle broadly; SentriAI focuses deeply on the per-action decision and its evidence. A team wanting deterministic runtime action governance would look to SentriAI, potentially alongside a lifecycle platform.
Does SentriAI cover the whole AI lifecycle?
No - that is not its aim. It concentrates on governing the action, with an AI-BOM for inventory and red-teaming for pre-deploy checks. A lifecycle security platform spans more phases; SentriAI goes deep on the runtime decision.
How do they complement each other?
Use a lifecycle platform for broad AI/data security coverage and SentriAI for deterministic, evidence-producing governance of the actions agents take.
What makes SentriAI distinct?
The Action Trust Score, the deterministic per-action PDP, and the tamper-evident evidence that maps to controls like SOC 2 CC6/CC7 - a runtime decision layer with an audit byproduct.
Stay in the loop
One practical finance briefing a week - new guides, checklists, and benchmarks.
Govern the action, not just the audit
See a live per-action verdict and trust score on your own AI agents. Talk to us - we will map it to your stack.
Talk to us