Push Security vs Adaptive Shield: browser identity control or Falcon Shield SSPM?
Push Security when the main buying consideration is AiTM phishing, ghost logins, and shadow SaaS at the browser. Adaptive Shield (Falcon Shield) when it is SaaS misconfigurations and entitlements across 200+ apps inside CrowdStrike.
A security lead asking for SaaS identity coverage usually means one of two day-to-day queues: stop account takeover and shadow logins where employees actually authenticate, or harden the SaaS apps the company already connected for misconfigs and overprivileged identities.
Between these two, Push Security is a browser extension security layer for AiTM phishing, session theft, device-code phishing, MFA and SSO gaps, ghost logins, and shadow SaaS discovered at the login event, with published pricing from $5 per user per month on an annual plan. Adaptive Shield ships as CrowdStrike Falcon Shield SSPM after CrowdStrike acquired Adaptive Shield in November 2024: 200+ SaaS apps, 3,500+ configuration checks, human and non-human identity entitlements, and SaaS threat alerts inside Falcon. The adaptive-shield.com site now redirects to Falcon Shield.
Match the primary workflow you still fail: browser-layer phishing and login-path identity, or Falcon-connected SaaS posture breadth.
| Job | Browser-layer SaaS identity and phishing control: AiTM / cloned logins / ClickFix / session hijacking, MFA and SSO guardrails, ghost logins, shadow SaaS and OAuth from login telemetry | SSPM as Falcon Shield: misconfigurations, entitlements for human and NHI accounts, shadow apps with posture context, SaaS behavior alerts across 200+ integrated apps |
|---|---|---|
| How a bad day closes | Warn or block a phishing or device-code page in the browser, flag a ghost login or missing MFA, guide the user to SSO or stronger auth at the point of login | Fail a hardening check or entitlement finding on a connected SaaS app, prioritize the fix, correlate a SaaS threat alert inside Falcon workflows |
| Day-to-day workflow | Phishing detections, MFA/SSO gaps, shadow apps, OAuth grants, risky extensions, AI usage policy hits | Failed posture checks, overprivileged or dormant SaaS identities, connected-app alerts, AI agent inventory inside SaaS tenants |
| Deploy | Browser extension via MDM, force-install, or enrollment pages; optional IdP API sync (Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, Okta) | Connect SaaS apps into Falcon Shield integrations; operated as part of the CrowdStrike Falcon platform |
| License/pricing | Public: $5/user/month annual ($6 monthly) up to 500 employees; Enterprise contact above that (pushsecurity.com pricing, checked 30 Sep 2026) | CrowdStrike sales / Falcon packaging; no public self-serve dollar table on the Falcon Shield marketing page (checked 30 Sep 2026) |
| Who operates it | SecOps, identity, and IT securing workforce browsers and SaaS logins without forcing a single enterprise browser | Cloud and SaaS security teams already on Falcon, or evaluating Falcon Shield as the SSPM module |
We reviewed pushsecurity.com product and pricing pages, CrowdStrike Falcon Shield and Adaptive Shield acquisition materials, and live community threads the same day (30 Sep 2026). We did not run either product in a paid tenant, so this is not a hands-on benchmark. Push remains independent. Adaptive Shield ships as Falcon Shield after the CrowdStrike close.
Push Security
Adaptive Shield
Push’s recent first-party signal is deep device code phishing research with in-browser warnings and blocks for kits that bypass password and MFA prompts. Adaptive Shield’s decisive packaging signal is Falcon Shield: 200+ apps and 3,500+ checks on the CrowdStrike invoice path, not a freestanding Adaptive Shield checkout.
Editions and pricing
The invoice question is whether you buy a published per-user browser control from Push, or a Falcon Shield SSPM module from CrowdStrike.
| Ownership (30 Sep 2026) | Independent. No acquisition announced during research. | CrowdStrike completed Adaptive Shield acquisition 20 Nov 2024; product marketed as Falcon Shield; adaptive-shield.com redirects to CrowdStrike |
|---|---|---|
| How you buy it now | Self-serve style public pricing on pushsecurity.com; card or bank transfer; Enterprise quote above 500 employees | CrowdStrike sales / Falcon platform packaging for Falcon Shield |
| Public units | $5 per user per month billed annually; $6 monthly; full platform in every license per Push | No public self-serve dollar meter verified on Falcon Shield marketing pages |
| What the invoice covers | Browser threat detection, identity and SaaS discovery, OAuth and extension controls, AI usage visibility, SIEM integrations | SSPM checks, SaaS identity and NHI posture, threat detection for connected apps, Falcon console workflow |
If procurement needs a published usage meter this week, Push posts one. Falcon Shield needs a CrowdStrike quote for your Falcon footprint.
How SaaS identity is seen
| Discovery center | Browser login and signup events: every app authentication method, MFA status, password strength, personal vs corporate account, shadow SaaS | API integrations into 200+ SaaS apps: configuration posture, entitlements, activity context, AI agents in SaaS platforms |
|---|---|---|
| Identity gaps called out | Ghost logins (password fallback), non-SSO paths, missing MFA, weak or reused passwords, shared accounts, OAuth consent risk | Overprivileged, dormant, or partially deprovisioned human and NHI accounts; misconfigurations across hardening checks |
| Shadow and AI surface | Shadow SaaS and shadow AI seen from browser use; AI prompt/upload/clipboard and agentic browser signals | Shadow apps correlated with posture integrations; AI agent discovery across SaaS such as Microsoft 365, Salesforce, and OpenAI per Falcon Shield materials |
| IdP relationship | Optional IdP sync enriches SSO apps, OAuth integrations, and MFA on the core IdP; extension still sees non-SSO apps the IdP never lists | SaaS posture sits alongside Falcon Identity Protection narratives across AD, cloud IdPs, and SaaS |
That session-cookie path is why an IdP-green MFA score is not the same as closing SaaS account takeover. In reverse-proxy AiTM phishing, the browser talks to an attacker-controlled proxy server, not to a kit that runs inside the browser. Between these two, Push sits in the browser where it can warn or block the phishing page before credentials or cookies leave. Falcon Shield sits on the SaaS tenant after apps are connected for posture and behavior.
How risk closes
| Phishing and session theft | Detect and optionally block AiTM, cloned logins, BitB, ClickFix, session hijacking, credential stuffing, device-code pages | Not a browser phishing proxy detector; SaaS threat detection focuses on suspicious user behavior, login anomalies, and device issues inside connected apps |
|---|---|---|
| Posture hardening | Guide MFA enrollment, SSO adoption, password changes, and app approval at the login moment | 3,500+ built-in security checks plus custom checks across the SaaS stack |
| Response path | Monitor, warn, or block in-browser; webhooks and SIEM/SOAR forwarding with attack technique context | Real-time alerts and automated responses in Falcon Shield / Falcon workflows |
| Who writes the next step | Security owns detection policy; employees self-remediate many identity gaps via guardrails | Security owns posture exceptions and entitlement fixes with app owners inside Falcon |
Auth versus session. Passkeys and strong MFA harden the authentication ceremony. They do not, by themselves, close session-cookie theft, device-code or OAuth grant abuse, or overprivileged SaaS entitlements after login succeeds. Push sits on the browser login path where it can warn or block phishing pages before credentials or cookies leave. Falcon Shield (Adaptive Shield) sits on connected SaaS tenants for posture and entitlement checks after apps are linked. Coverage also differs by managed browser extension, unmanaged devices, and SaaS apps the SSPM connector does not support – confirm those boundaries on the quote.
Where they overlap
Both talk SaaS identity risk, shadow apps, OAuth-era abuse, and AI agents in the SaaS path. Both can surface accounts and apps that an IdP inventory alone misses. An RFP that only says “SSPM / SaaS identity security” will get adjacent demos. The remaining split is browser phishing and login-path guardrails from an independent Push license versus Falcon Shield posture checks across connected SaaS apps on a CrowdStrike invoice – plus managed, unmanaged, and unsupported-app coverage boundaries.
Broader SaaS posture shortlists live under SSPM tools. Sibling compares live under Compare, including Adaptive Shield vs AppOmni.
When to use both
Browser protection and SaaS posture can be complementary rather than automatic duplication: Push as the browser phishing and login-path identity layer for the workforce, Falcon Shield as the SaaS tenant posture and entitlement layer for apps you already connect in Falcon. Buying both as if they solved the same single gap is the wasteful pattern. If one team owns both workflows, pick the primary buying consideration you still fail, or run both when those layers are genuinely separate.
Choose Push Security when you need independent browser-layer phishing and SaaS login-path identity control with public per-user pricing. Choose Adaptive Shield as Falcon Shield when you need SSPM breadth and SaaS identity posture inside CrowdStrike.
FAQs
How does Falcon Shield relate to Adaptive Shield?
Adaptive Shield is the former product name. After CrowdStrike’s November 2024 acquisition, the SSPM line is marketed as Falcon Shield inside CrowdStrike, and adaptive-shield.com redirects there. Push Security remains independent.
Is Push an SSPM platform like Falcon Shield?
Not as the same product center. Between these two, Push centers browser phishing detection and login-path identity and shadow SaaS discovery. Falcon Shield centers API-connected SaaS posture management with thousands of configuration checks. Push can support SaaS security outcomes; it is not a drop-in replacement for Falcon Shield’s 200+ app SSPM checks.
Does Falcon Shield replace browser phishing controls?
Falcon Shield’s published strength is SaaS misconfigurations, entitlements, and threat alerts inside connected apps. Push’s published strength is detecting and blocking browser-based phishing and session attacks where the user authenticates. Falcon Shield posture green does not automatically stop every AiTM path for every auth method: browser controls, IdP session policies, and app-side entitlements each cover different residual risk. Confirm Push extension coverage on managed versus unmanaged browsers, and Falcon Shield connector coverage for apps you actually run.
What public prices should buyers note?
Push posts $5 per user per month on annual billing and $6 monthly for up to 500 employees on pushsecurity.com (checked 30 Sep 2026), with Enterprise pricing above that. Falcon Shield did not post a public self-serve dollar table on CrowdStrike marketing pages checked the same day; budget from a Falcon quote.
