X
Xaish
…
Pricing · Two tiers

Payments are free.Security is $10k.

The AI payment stack rides along with Paynnt at no charge. The AI security stack is a flat $10,000 a month — no seat counts, no per-call meter once you're in.

Paynnt + Payment AI

Free with Paynnt
Free
  • 52 payment agents — invoicing, AR and AP, fraud, FX, disputes, agent budgets
  • Paynnt crypto rail: self-custody SOL and USDC on Solana (devnet today; mainnet pending licensing)
  • Cards/ACH rail is in development — charges fail honestly (501/503), never a fake success
  • Spend caps the rail actually enforces — per transaction, per day, per month
  • Embed widgets you can drop onto any site
  • $0.30 per transaction, $0.50 per other service — only when something runs
Open PaynntLearn about Paynnt →

Security tier

Premium
$10,000/month
  • 71 AI Cybersecurity agents — pentesting, vuln management, IDS, threat modeling, IR
  • 23 Crypto and Web3 Security agents — contracts, bridges, ZK, MEV, wallet UX
  • 16 agents pre-pass through 10 industry-standard OSS scanners (Slither · Trivy · Bandit · Semgrep · YARA · Presidio · circomspect · detect-secrets · Solhint · Nmap)
  • Same suite is reachable from Paynnt, so your agents can use them too
  • Server-enforced gating — no client-side flag to flip
  • Embed any agent into your own customer dashboard
  • Every agent is a typed POST. Your agent can call them all
  • A security lead walks you through setup
Subscribe via StripeOr pay $10k in USDC via Paynnt →
Workflow chains

Why not just paste into ChatGPT?

Most security workflows are chains, not single prompts. Each link ingests the previous link's typed output. Five concrete examples — the kind of thing copy-paste into a chat window doesn't actually replicate.

Dependency CVE → exploit → patch

A real vuln triage chain. Each step consumes the prior step's typed output.

  1. Agent #19
    Vulnerability Management AI
    Trivy + OSV.dev finds CVEs in your manifest
  2. Agent #33
    Risk Prioritizer (EPSS)
    Pulls EPSS scores, ranks by exploit probability
  3. Agent #3
    Reachability Scanner
    Decides which CVE is reachable from your entry points
  4. Agent #9
    Auto-Patch Engine
    Generates the exact version pin + breaking-change shim
Why ChatGPT can't replicate this

ChatGPT can't run Trivy against your repo, doesn't query EPSS, and has no typed handoff between steps. Each agent here ingests the previous agent's structured output — copy-paste isn't a substitute.

Smart contract audit (ChainGuard)

Six narrow specialists where pasting Solidity into a general chat misses the bridge-specific or governance-specific failure modes.

  1. Agent #52
    Smart Contract Scanner
    Slither + Solhint find reentrancy, unprotected upgrades, etc.
  2. Agent #58
    Bridge Security Reviewer
    Cross-chain message bus + replay protection review
  3. Agent #66
    Governance Attack Modeler
    Capture path + cost-of-attack vs payoff math
  4. Agent #64
    Custody & Signing Review
    HSM / MPC / multisig posture against NIST + CCSS
Why ChatGPT can't replicate this

ChatGPT doesn't run Slither, doesn't know SWC IDs verbatim, and won't credential-redact private keys you might paste. Each agent above runs the right static analyzer for its domain and embeds the findings in the prompt the model actually triages.

AI agent security (red + defense)

Four-agent loop: review deployment → generate attacks → propose guardrails → verify runtime traces.

  1. Agent #37
    AI Deployment Guardian
    Static review of system prompt + tools + retrieval
  2. Agent #5
    AI-on-AI Pentester
    Generates 14 attack categories with exact inputs
  3. Agent #4
    AI Agent Defender
    Proposes guardrails with effort + priority + ordering
  4. Agent #7
    Harmful Agent Detector
    Runtime trace review — did the guardrails hold?
Why ChatGPT can't replicate this

ChatGPT will refuse half of #5's attack generations on safety grounds (correctly — they're attacks). The platform builds them anyway because the use case is testing your OWN agent. Plus #7 needs the original trace, system prompt, tool inventory, AND the proposed guardrails — that's not a single prompt.

Incident response (detect → hunt → IR → learn)

Four phases of an incident, each handed off as structured input.

  1. Agent #46
    Universal Threat Detector
    YARA + Sigma over logs/IOCs/binaries
  2. Agent #42
    Hidden Attacker Detector
    Dwell-time hunt across the timeline
  3. Agent #35
    Incident Responder
    Generates a runbook keyed to the specific TTPs
  4. Agent #36
    Lessons-Learned Synthesizer
    New detections to add for the same TTP class
Why ChatGPT can't replicate this

ChatGPT doesn't index a YARA rule pack against your binaries. Even if you paste the YARA hits manually, the handoff between #42's timeline reconstruction and #35's runbook needs both — typed.

Data governance + DLP

Presidio + AI triage + jurisdiction tagging, then policy review.

  1. Agent #10
    DLP & DSPM AI
    Presidio finds PII; AI classifies under GDPR/HIPAA/PCI/etc.
  2. Agent #12
    Secrets & Cert Manager
    detect-secrets finds keys; AI writes rotation runbook
  3. Agent #8
    AI Vulnerability Scanner
    Semgrep finds code-level data-handling bugs in the same paste
  4. Agent #45
    Data Shield (policy)
    Reviews your written policy against the actual flows
Why ChatGPT can't replicate this

Pasting customer data into ChatGPT to ask 'is this PII?' is the exact thing you're trying to audit AGAINST. The platform's credential-redaction layer strips secrets server-side BEFORE the LLM sees the payload, and the audit log shows what was redacted.

Every result also ships with the raw OSS scanner output (10 industry-standard scanners), a credential-redaction audit log, and exact token usage — so customers, auditors, and your own agents can verify what the platform did and at what cost. The subscription is for the infrastructure, not the model calls.

Need a private deployment, dedicated tenancy, or sub-tenant billing? Get in touch.