Escape (AI pentesting and DAST) vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
Escape (AI pentesting and DAST) (Escape) and StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) (StackHawk (StackHawk, Inc.)) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index. They share no framework tags in our dataset.
| Field |  Escape (AI pentesting and DAST) |  StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Escape | StackHawk (StackHawk, Inc.) |
| HQ | France · Europe | United States · North America |
| Primary category | Code security | Code security |
| Also listed in | Code security, Security | Code security, Security |
| Summary | Offensive security platform using AI agents for attack surface discovery, business-logic DAST and multi-agent pentesting (Cascade) of APIs and web apps. | Security plugin for AI coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Codex, Antigravity) that runs dynamic tests against the running app during the coding session, has the agent triage and fix what it finds, then rescans to prove the fix before the pull request. Published at US$10 per user per month. |
| Framework tags (Agent Index) | — | — |
| Frameworks (vendor-claimed) | — | — |
| Capabilities / tasks | appsec, pen test management, attack surface | appsec, remediation, vulnerability management, agent platform with security integrations |
| Pricing (as published) | Quote-based | Wingman: US$10 per user per month, unlimited apps, 14-day free trial (no card). Scale plan: contact sales. |
| Pricing model | quote | published-tiers |
| Primary source | https://escape.tech/blog/introducing-cascade-the-multi-agent-penetration-testing/ | https://www.stackhawk.com/product/wingman/ |
| Last checked | 2026-10-18 | 2026-10-18 |
| Official site | https://escape.tech/ | https://www.stackhawk.com/product/wingman/ |
Listings tagged agent platform with security integrations are coding platforms with a documented scanner or vulnerability-fix workflow, not dedicated application-security products. Dedicated AppSec listings are compared on the AI code security agents table.
Side-by-side data is generated from the open dataset. “Vendor-claimed” frameworks are as marketed by each vendor and not verified by Agent Index; framework tags indicate relevance, not certification. Request current quotes from each vendor before buying. This page does not rank or score vendors. Sponsored comparisons, if any, will be labelled.
Use-case comparisons
- AI code security agents — 25 listings (Application security scanning, suggested or automated code fixes, and pull-request security review)
- Agentic pentesting AI agents — 14 listings (Autonomous or AI-assisted penetration testing, attack-surface testing and exploitable-path verification)
Related
- Escape (AI pentesting and DAST) alternatives
- StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) alternatives
- Best code security AI agents
More Escape (AI pentesting and DAST) comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs Escape (AI pentesting and DAST)
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs Escape (AI pentesting and DAST)
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs Escape (AI pentesting and DAST)
- Checkmarx One Assist vs Escape (AI pentesting and DAST)
- Claude Code security review vs Escape (AI pentesting and DAST)
More StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Checkmarx One Assist vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Claude Code security review vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)