gate-oc-audit vs PreFlight

gate-oc-audit and PreFlight are both guardrails & safety tracked by AIDiveForge. Below is a side-by-side comparison of pricing, capabilities, platforms, and ownership — sourced from each tool's live website and verified before publishing.

gate-oc-audit

Gate operates as a drop-in proxy: your agent points at one endpoint, Gate inspects every outbound prompt and every inbound response, then enforces the policy you write — blocking injections, redacting secrets and PII, flagging ambiguous cases, and writing every decision to a tamper-evident audit log anchored to a blockchain. The vendor reports 97.4% F1 across 16 public prompt-injection benchmarks and a head-to-head F1 of 96.6% versus Lakera Guard's 83.7% on four matched datasets; methodology and per-benchmark scores are published. Token compression and prefix caching run on every request, and the vendor states users see 20% or more token savings without changing model outputs. Gate is in private beta with no self-hosted deployment option, so teams with hard data-residency requirements hit a wall immediately.

PreFlight

PreFlight installs via npm and runs as a pre-commit gate, scanning AI-generated code for security vulnerabilities in auth flows, database logic, and SQL patterns — then offering deterministic or AI-assisted patches inline. It integrates with VS Code, Cursor, and MCP clients, so the scan happens in the environment where the AI code was written. The free tier caps patches at ten, which is sufficient for evaluation but stops short of daily use on an active codebase. Teams that exceed that ceiling without a pro key lose the fix-application step and are left with scan output only. The repo is open-source and self-hosted, so the scan never phones home.

Attribute	gate-oc-audit	PreFlight
Pricing	Paid	Paid
Price	—	$19/mo
Free trial	No	No
Open source	Yes	Yes
Has API	Yes	No
Self-hosted option	No	Yes
Platforms	Web proxy, desktop app	CLI, npm, VS Code, Cursor
Pros	Proxy-based architecture means your agent changes one endpoint, not its entire codebase, so you get injection defense without a rewrite and without touching model provider credentials. Bidirectional inspection catches both inbound injections from tool responses and outbound PII or credential leaks in model replies, which means a single misconfigured response cannot silently send a customer's SSN or an AWS key to the wrong place. Vendor-published benchmark methodology with per-dataset scores lets you audit the 97.4% F1 claim yourself rather than taking marketing copy on faith — which matters when you are deciding whether to put this in front of production traffic. Inline token compression and cache-prefix marking run automatically, so teams switching from direct API calls to Gate can offset the added infrastructure cost against token savings the vendor states average 20% or more per request. Policy-driven rule enforcement writes every block, redact, and flag decision to a tamper-evident audit log, so compliance reviews have a verifiable record of what the agent was told and what it said — without manual logging code in your agent.	Runs entirely locally with no cloud dependency for scanning, so code never leaves the machine during the security check — which matters for teams under data-residency or compliance constraints. Pre-commit integration means vulnerabilities surface before they enter the repository rather than at PR review, so the team avoids the back-and-forth of post-commit security findings. RLS and SQL safety checks are explicitly scoped, so the specific class of vulnerability that AI tools most often miss in database logic gets dedicated coverage rather than a generic lint pass. MCP client support lets other tools and editor workflows invoke the scanner directly, so the security gate can be embedded in automated flows without requiring a separate manual step. Open-source codebase allows teams to audit the scan rules themselves, so trust in the tool does not depend solely on vendor claims about what it detects.
Cons	No self-hosted deployment option exists on the current vendor page. Teams in healthcare, finance, or government with data-residency or network-isolation requirements cannot use Gate at all — they move to on-premise alternatives or build detection in-house. The 1% false-positive rate reported in the benchmark means Gate will block or flag legitimate requests. At low request volumes this is a minor inconvenience; in high-throughput pipelines where a blocked call means a failed agent task, teams need a human-review queue or a fallback path — neither of which is described in the current docs, adding implementation overhead. Private beta access is invite-only with no stated general availability timeline on the vendor page, so teams cannot schedule Gate into a production roadmap with confidence. Projects that need a committed SLA or guaranteed capacity move to established providers like Lakera Guard despite the lower reported benchmark scores.	The free tier caps patch application at ten — once that limit is hit, the tool continues to surface findings but stops applying fixes. A team using AI coding tools daily will exhaust this on a single feature branch, forcing a licensing decision before they have enough production signal to evaluate the tool's accuracy. The scanner is scoped to auth, database, and SQL vulnerability classes. Teams that need coverage across a broader attack surface — dependency vulnerabilities, secret detection, SSRF, or injection beyond SQL — will need a separate tool running in parallel, which means maintaining two scan configurations and reconciling their output. The project shows a single star and no forks on GitHub at the time of curation, with an open issue logged. Teams evaluating this against established SAST tools with large community rule sets and documented false-positive rates will find precious little external evidence of production use — which is the condition under which a security-conscious team switches to a competitor with a longer track record.

Bottom line

Only gate-oc-audit exposes a public API. Choose based on which difference matters most for your workflow.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between gate-oc-audit and PreFlight?

gate-oc-audit is Paid and open source, while PreFlight is Paid and open source. Compare pricing, free trial, API, platforms, and pros/cons in the table above on AIDiveForge.

Is gate-oc-audit better than PreFlight?

It depends on your workflow. Use the side-by-side attributes (pricing, open source, API, self-hosted, platforms) to decide. AIDiveForge does not rank a universal winner — we publish verified facts so you can choose.