Back to vendors
M

Mindgard

Also known as: ATLAS Adviser, Mindgard DAST-AI

Visit site
Entry priceContact sales; no prices published. Demo on request.Full pricing detail

Automated AI red teaming of the customer's agents and AI systems, from reconnaissance through multi-step attacks, run continuously or in CI/CD, with a Python SDK, CLI and API and runtime protection.

Mindgard sells an AI security platform built around automated red teaming of the customer's AI systems and agents. Its red teamer emulates an adversary's workflow. Agent-native reconnaissance profiles the target's models, agents, tools, guardrails and system prompts and finds shadow AI, then exploitation planning and execution chain one-shot and multi-step attacks across agents, tools, APIs, data sources and workflows.

Testing runs continuously as systems change and from CI/CD, the CLI, Burp Suite or a single click, and findings arrive with evidence, attacker context and remediation guidance mapped to OWASP, MITRE ATLAS, the NIST AI RMF and the EU AI Act. Runtime protection identifies and responds to attacks in production. Mindgard offers a Python SDK, CLI and API reference for projects, tests, findings, datasets, multi-turn tests and reconnaissance, and holds SOC 2 Type 2 certification. The company came out of Lancaster University research and is headquartered in Boston and London.

Vendor details

Canonical URL

https://mindgard.ai

Category

Security / SOC agent

Funding status

Independent. Mindgard was founded in 2022 from Dr. Peter Garraghan's AI security research at Lancaster University. Garraghan is Chief Science Officer and James Brear is CEO. The company is headquartered in Boston and London and raised a seed round in 2024.

Company status

independent

Use cases & customers

Primary use cases

automated AI red teaming of models, agents, and applicationsAI attack surface reconnaissance including shadow AI, guardrails, and system promptsCI/CD-native adversarial testing on every pipeline runruntime threat detection and response for production AIMITRE ATLAS and OWASP-standardized AI risk reporting and compliance

Target customers

enterprises deploying LLMs, agents, and multimodal AI into productionsecurity teams without in-house AI security specialistsdevelopment teams embedding adversarial testing in CI/CDoffensive security practitioners (Burp Suite workflow)

Deployment options

SaaS platform; testing runs from CI/CD, the CLI, Burp Suite or a single click against the customer's endpoints

Integrations

Targets the customer's AI endpoints and agents across providers such as OpenAI, Anthropic and AWS; runs from CI/CD workflow integrations, the CLI and Burp Suite; Python SDK and API reference.

In practice

A product team is about to ship a customer service agent and needs to know whether it can be talked into leaking its system prompt or misusing a tool. Mindgard maps the agent first, then runs one shot and multi step attacks against it and returns findings with evidence and remediation advice.

Every new model version goes through the CI/CD pipeline. A Mindgard test runs on each pipeline run, so a drop in jailbreak resistance shows up before the change reaches production.

A security lead has to report AI risk against the EU AI Act and the NIST AI RMF. Mindgard maps every finding to those frameworks, and the MITRE ATLAS Adviser rolls risk up across all of the organization's tests.

Agentic Index coverage score

8.0 / 14 capabilities · 57%

Integrations & Tool Calling Full

The red teamer attacks the customer's AI endpoints, chatbots and agents, with presets for OpenAI, Anthropic, Azure and Hugging Face targets and listed support for Docker and AWS, and it runs from CI/CD workflow integrations, the CLI and the Burp Suite extension. Targets are reached with the customer's own API keys, request templates and response selectors. Tests cover the prompts, memory, data sources, guardrails, MCP or A2A servers and permissions around an agent, not only the model.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai, /automated-ai-red-teaming and docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/testing-via-cli; docs.mindgard.airead 2026-10-06

Workflow Orchestration Partial

The red teamer follows a fixed adversary workflow of reconnaissance, exploitation planning and execution, chaining one shot and multi step attacks, and its adaptive attack agents learn from each response and change tactics. The platform runs its four stages, Discover, Recon, Attack and Defend, again as systems change. Customers choose the targets, the attacks and the goal of a multi turn test, but they cannot build a flow of their own.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai, /automated-ai-red-teaming and docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/testing-via-cliread 2026-10-06

Knowledge Grounding & RAG Partial

Reconnaissance profiles the customer's AI systems, covering models, agents, tools, guardrails and system prompts, into a map of the estate, with recon types for guardrails, system prompt extraction, tool discovery, input and output encoding, output formatting and output rendering. Attacks draw on Mindgard's attack library and its own research, which has publicly identified more than 150 AI vulnerabilities, building on a decade of AI security research that began at Lancaster University. Recon results are kept per project, but there is no store the customer fills with its own documents.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai and docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txtread 2026-10-06

Human Oversight & Guardrails Partial

Findings go to the customer's team with remediation guidance, and the team decides what to fix. Runtime protection identifies and responds to attacks in real time, and no step has a person approve a response before it happens. Testers choose which attacks run, can run a subset of the library, and set the technique and goal of each multi turn test.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai, docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txt and /user-guide/testing-via-cliread 2026-10-06

Security, Identity & Governance Full

Mindgard holds AICPA SOC 2 Type 2 certification. SAML single sign on can be enabled on request, so a team signs in through its own identity provider, such as Microsoft Entra, Okta or Google Workspace. Projects are shared by role, with an owner who created the project, admins who add, change or remove members, and members who view results and run tests. There is no audit log of activity on the platform. The framework mapping Mindgard offers applies to the customer's findings, not to Mindgard itself.

SourceMindgard, docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/enterprise-setup, /user-guide/sharing-projects and mindgard.airead 2026-10-06

Observability & Auditability Partial

Each finding comes with clear evidence, attacker context and remediation guidance mapped to OWASP, MITRE ATLAS, the NIST AI RMF and the EU AI Act. Test results group flagged events by threat category and show every interaction in a test with its input, its output and Mindgard's observations, each event flagged or cleared, and the attack list downloads as CSV. The MITRE ATLAS Adviser rolls up risk across every test in the organization. There is no trace of the steps or tool calls inside the customer's agents.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai/automated-ai-red-teaming, docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/test-results and /user-guide/reportingread 2026-10-06

Memory & State Persistence Not documented

Within a run, the adaptive attack agents learn from the target's responses and change tactics, and each project keeps its tests, findings and recon results. The agents keep no memory from one run to the next.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai/automated-ai-red-teaming and docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txt; mindgard.airead 2026-10-06

Deployment & Data Residency Partial

Every customer is assigned to a Mindgard instance, and instances run in several parts of the world to meet data residency requirements, though the regions are not named. The CLI and the Burp Suite extension run in the customer's environment and proxy every model interaction, while Mindgard's SaaS application plans the attacks, judges them and stores the results. Testing runs from CI/CD, the CLI, Burp Suite or a single click against the customer's endpoints. HTTPS proxies are supported and SOCKS proxies are not. There is no self hosted or customer cloud option.

SourceMindgard, docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/enterprise-setup and /user-guide/system-architectureread 2026-10-06

Prebuilt Agents, Templates & Packs Partial

A prebuilt attack library ships with the platform, "an ever growing list of LLM/ML attack techniques", with named jailbreaks such as Crescendo, ActorAttack, AsciiArtAttack and DevModeV2, prompt injection encodings such as Ascii85 and ANSI escapes, and violation tests such as PromptAlignment and MaliciousGeneration.

AI safety datasets come ready to use, customers can generate or bring their own datasets and run a subset of attacks, and a remediation library covers sixteen defenses, from guardrails and output filtering to differential privacy. Mindgard sells no prebuilt agents for a customer to adopt.

SourceMindgard, docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txt; docs.mindgard.airead 2026-10-06

Triggers & Channel Coverage Full

Red teaming runs continuously as AI systems change and on pipeline runs through CI/CD workflow integrations, and runtime protection responds to attacks in production as they happen. Tests can also start from the web app, the CLI, the Python SDK, the Burp Suite extension or a single click.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai/automated-ai-red-teaming and docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txtread 2026-10-06

Model Flexibility & Routing Not documented

Any target model can be tested, with ready presets for OpenAI, Anthropic, Azure and Hugging Face, but Mindgard offers no model choice or routing for its own operation. It does not name the models behind its own attack planning.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai and docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/testing-via-cliread 2026-10-06

APIs, SDKs & MCP Extensibility Full

Developers get a Python SDK, a CLI reference and an API reference covering projects, tests, findings, datasets, multi turn tests and reconnaissance, and Mindgard publishes an OpenAPI specification. The CLI installs from PyPI and runs reconnaissance, single turn and multi turn tests against a target set inline or in a config file, and a Burp Suite extension brings the same tests into a penetration tester's tools. The API can create findings as well as list them.

SourceMindgard, docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txt and /user-guide/testing-via-cli; docs.mindgard.airead 2026-10-06

Testing, Debugging & Optimization Full

Mindgard runs continuous automated red teaming of the customer's AI agents and systems, before deployment and in production, including multi step attacks across agents, tools, APIs and data sources. Each run returns findings, evidence and remediation, and multi turn tests run from the CLI and the API with a technique and goal the tester sets.

Policies let the customer write the guidelines its application must follow, checked by regex refusal and policy violation observations that add flags or filter out irrelevant ones. The weaknesses it looks for include prompt injection, jailbreaks, system prompt leakage, model extraction, unsafe tool use, excessive agency and data or memory poisoning.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai/automated-ai-red-teaming, docs.mindgard.ai/user-guide/policies/overview and /user-guide/testing-via-cliread 2026-10-06

Browser & Computer Use Not documented

Testing runs against inference and API endpoints, and a guide covers testing chatbot applications. Its agents do not control a browser or computer.

SourceMindgard, mindgard.ai and docs.mindgard.ai/llms.txtread 2026-10-06

The Agentic Index coverage score grades every vendor Full, Partial or Not documented against the same 14 buyer facing capabilities, from public evidence only. Each capability links to how all vendors in the index score on it. How this evidence is graded

Pricing

Contact sales; no prices published. Demo on request.

Inference, not stated by the vendor: AI systems under continuous testing plus any expert services.

What is public

Platform capabilities (reconnaissance, automated red teaming, runtime protection), deployment paths (CI/CD, CLI, Burp Suite) and SOC 2 Type 2 are public; no plans or prices are disclosed.

Variable cost rationale

Inference, not stated by the vendor: cost likely grows with the number of AI systems tested and the depth of expert services.

Sales call required

Yes, required for paid access

Free / trial

Not published

Agentic Index verified 2026-09-28

Alternatives to Mindgard

The closest documented capability profiles to Mindgard among security and SOC agents tracked by Agentic Index, ordered by similarity on the same 14 point evidence the rankings use. No vendor pays for placement.

  • HiddenLayer9.0 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Observability & Auditability and Deployment & Data ResidencyMindgard vs HiddenLayer →
  • WitnessAI8.5 / 14Adds documented Model Flexibility & Routing
  • Capsule Security9.0 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Knowledge Grounding & RAG and Human Oversight & Guardrails
  • Idira8.0 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Observability & Auditability and Deployment & Data Residency
  • Knostic6.0 / 14A lighter documented profile than Mindgard
  • Lasso Security7.0 / 14Fuller documented coverage on Observability & Auditability

Similarity is computed from each vendor's Agentic Index coverage score evidence, axis by axis, not from the totals. How this evidence is graded

Contact us

Found a vendor we missed? Have feedback on the index? We'd love to hear from you.