command.

To counter an AI, you need an AI you can control. Scope, RoE, and an OPPLAN enforced at runtime.

Try the demo Read the docs

Every sentence on screen is what the agent printed while it found a SQL injection on a login form, chained it into a cross-tenant read, and re-tested all sixteen findings against a negative control.

Recorded on a read-only sample engagement. The transcript, findings and evidence are real run output.
Private beta complete — retooling for launch

We're rebuilding for general availability.

Private beta's done and we're retooling for launch. Leave your email and we'll be the first to tell you when we reopen — the interactive demo still works in the meantime.

No spam — just the launch notice.

Or walk the interactive demo

Autonomous offense is here. The question is whether your red team runs with the same leverage, under rules you set.

  1. 01

    Autonomy needs controls

    Agents stay bounded by scope, Rules of Engagement, OPSEC posture, and explicit operator concessions.

  2. 02

    Plans must survive execution

    The OPPLAN tracks objectives, blockers, pivots, evidence, and next actions as the run changes.

  3. 03

    Expertise should be reusable

    Specialist agents load Skillogy knowledge and ATT&CK context instead of relying on one generic prompt.

Highest published pass rate.

Pass rate across 104 real-world exploitation challenges, against every publicly reported agent.

Decepticon
98.08%
Strix
96.15%
Shannonwhite-box
96.15%
PentestGPT
86.5%
Red-MIRROR
86%
XBOWcommercial
85%
Cyber-Auto
84.62%
MAPTA
76.9%
PentestAgent
50%
AutoPT
46%
VulnBot
6%

Decepticon: black-box, vulnerability tags as hint, 102 / 104 solved. Shannon shown white-box, hint-removed. Figures as published by each project.

01Is it safe to run against real targets?
Every action is bounded by scope and Rules of Engagement enforced at runtime. Out-of-scope actions are blocked before they fire, and OPSEC posture stays under operator control.
02How is this different from a single AI agent?
Recon, initial access, and post-exploitation run as specialist sub-agents grounded in ATT&CK and Skillogy playbooks, not one generic prompt. You watch each one work in real time.
03Do I stay in control of the run?
Yes. You set the OPPLAN up front through a guided interview. It tracks objectives, blockers, pivots, and evidence, and updates as the run evolves. You approve scope and every concession.
04What proof is there that it works?
Highest published pass rate on the XBOW validation benchmark: 98.08% (102 of 104 challenges), ahead of every publicly reported agent.
05How do I try it?
Sign in and a guided demo walks you through a read-only sample engagement at no cost. Bring your own scope when you are ready to run.
06What does it cost?
The guided demo and sample engagement are free. See current plans on the pricing page.
Threat — The attack already runs itself.
01 — Threat

The attack already runs itself.

Autonomous offense is loose in the perimeter, moving faster than a quarterly engagement can answer.

Command — You declare the rules first.
02 — Command

You declare the rules first.

Scope, OPSEC posture, and explicit operator concessions are set before a single agent moves.

Range — Your estate becomes terrain.
03 — Range

Your estate becomes terrain.

Segments, hosts, and trust boundaries are mapped into the ground the operation is planned against.

Execution — Specialists, not one generic prompt.
04 — Execution

Specialists, not one generic prompt.

Agents load Skillogy knowledge and ATT&CK context, then take the path the target actually allows.

OPPLAN — The plan survives contact.
05 — OPPLAN

The plan survives contact.

Objectives, blockers, pivots, and evidence stay current as the run changes shape.

Access — Command is yours.
06 — Access

Command is yours.

One console for the whole operation — from rules of engagement to evidence you can act on.

Start with scope, RoE, and an OPPLAN. Decepticon keeps autonomous red-team execution observable, constrained, and ATT&CK-mapped.

Read the DocsTry the demo