Tooling for attack
and defense.
Three products, one team. Endpoint defense, autonomous pentest, and runtime defense. Free at the edge for individuals; per-seat for teams; licensed for operators.
One end-to-end defense of everything your code touches: find the weakness first, guard it at runtime, stop what still reaches the device, correlate all of it in one brain.
Trusted across organizations &
financial institutions
We build the tools we wish
existed when nobody was looking.
In July 2024, a single kernel-driver update bricked 8.5 million machines[1] in a morning. The fix was a manual safe-mode visit per machine. The product was the biggest name in endpoint security.
That's the failure mode we're built against. Not the threat. The tool we use against the threat. An EDR you can't turn off and can't silently crash. A pentest tool that scoreboard-verifies what it claims.
Written in Rust; releases signed and hash-verified. No “AI-powered” copy where it doesn't belong.
The product line.
Each one solves a real problem and ships under its own brand. Don't need both? Don't buy both.
Learns how each app, API and LLM normally behaves, then blocks the deviations a signature WAF can't see.
Shield is the defensive counterpart to Blue's endpoint and Red's offense: it guards everything your code touches at runtime. A one-line SDK learns a positive-security baseline per tenant (not a global model) across web apps, APIs and LLM apps, while protective DNS and connect-everything telemetry cover the network and cloud. One correlation brain fuses it all, so an attacker hitting your app, your DNS and your cloud is oneincident. It proves what it blocks, and it doesn't claim to prevent every zero-day.
$29/mo · Business $149/mo · Enterprise custom · MSSP wholesale · self-serveAn EDR that catches ransomware in under a second, and can't brick your fleet on a bad update.
The big-name kernel drivers BSOD-looped 8.5 million machines last year[1]. Blue rides kernel-authorized event streams (EndpointSecurity on macOS, eBPF on Linux, ETW on Windows) that can't panic the kernel. Behavior-led detection on that stream (ML and behavioral chains catch what signatures miss, YARA and threat-intel IOCs catch the known), plus in-kernel network blocking that severs C2 the instant it is flagged.
<50ms, led by behavior, not signatures alone<1sAutonomous pentest, from recon to zero-day. Every finding proven.
Red plans, executes, and replans across the real Kali arsenal through a closed-loop LLM, then proves every finding before it reports it. Recon, vulnerability assessment, live exploitation, and novel zero-day discovery. In a controlled ablation it surfaced close to an order of magnitude more validated findings than single-pass automation (p<0.001)[2], and it found and disclosed a new memory-safety bug in an open-source library.
CWPack with a reproducing proof and a suggested fixCVE-2024-38476 · CVE-2023-25690free · Pro $99/mo · Business $599/mo · Enterprise custom · self-serve, no setup feeOne stack. Three coordinates.
Each product is shippable on its own. Together they cover a whole engagement. Guarding everything your code touches at runtime, stopping what still reaches the device, and finding the weaknesses before anyone else, all correlated in one brain. A customer never has to glue separate vendors together to answer one question.
Why Blue, when Falcon exists?
The honest answer: because Blue is architected for five constraints the big-name EDRs took shortcuts on. Each row below is a concrete capability, not a marketing claim. Every ✓ on the Blue column is something we'd defend in a technical interview.
Two questions decide which EDR you buy. Does an individual get the real engine for free? And is the agent source readable? Falcon: no and no. Blue: yes and yes.
Three ways to get started.
Pick a product. Blue and Red are live and shipping today; Shield is self-serve and free to start.
Questions you'd ask in a real conversation.
We're skipping the marketing dance. The full architecture spec is on the trust center. Here are the ones that actually come up, across Shield, Red and Blue.
What does Nemesis Labs actually sell?
Three security products around one idea: detection is cheap and getting cheaper, and proof is not. Nemesis Shieldis per-tenant runtime protection that learns each app's own normal behavior and blocks the deviations a signature WAF can't see across web apps, APIs, LLM features, the browser and the network. Nemesis Red is an autonomous pentest engine that has to prove every finding on a scoreboard before it counts. Nemesis Blue is a hardened endpoint agent, free for individuals. Shield is self-serve with a free tier; you can protect an app in about two minutes.
How does Nemesis Shield protect my app without seeing my source code?
It learns, then enforces. You add one line of SDK: Python, Node, Go, Ruby, PHP, Java, .NET, Rust, the browser (React/Angular/Vue/jQuery) or Supabase Edge. The SDK computes a privacy-preserving shape of each request locally (method, normalized route, whether the caller was authenticated) and never ships your request bodies, secrets or source. It watches real traffic in observe mode, builds a per-tenant baseline of how your app actually behaves, and once you approve it, blocks anything off-baseline in-process. You flip observe to enforce from the console with no redeploy.
Isn't Nemesis Shield just a WAF or RASP?
No. A WAF matches generic attack signatures, so it misses abuse specific to your app and flags legitimate traffic that merely looks unusual. Shield is positive-security: it enforces “this app only ever behaves in these ways,” which catches zero-days, broken object-level authorization (BOLA) and business-logic abuse a signature never sees. It also protects legacy and unpatchedframeworks: an exploit request isn't your app's normal behavior, so it's blocked even before you patch. For checkout pages, the browser SDK maps directly to the client-side controls PCI DSS 4.0.1 made mandatory.
Is Nemesis Red just another AI-generated exploit demo?
No. Red's scoreboard verification is the whole point. Every claimed exploit has to land in a third-party ledger before it counts. You can't lie to a scoreboard. The agent is built around the constraint that if it can't prove the exploit, the exploit didn't happen.
New vendor. Why should I trust Nemesis Blue with kernel access?
You shouldn't, yet. The agent ships with a per-platform hardening story. macOS: Apple Developer-ID + notarization, hardened runtime, Team-ID-pinned self-check. Linux: seccomp ptrace-deny, capability drops, immutable-flag on the installed binary; releases are Ed25519-signed and hash-verified. Windows:service DACL hardening, with Authenticode code-signing rolling out. A modified binary fails its own self-check, and the trust center publishes the threat model honestly, including the limits. We're also Nemesis Red's own customer: the same team that builds Blue gets it attacked by Red before each release.
What data actually leaves my machine or app?
Very little, and it's documented byte for byte in the trust center. Nemesis Blue sends heartbeat metadata only (agent version, integrity hash, threat-count delta), never file contents, command lines or browser data. Nemesis Shield ships behavioral shapes (method, normalized route, auth), never your request bodies, secrets or source. Both have free tiers and are opt-out down to minimal outbound traffic.