This article takes an honest look at the features of HUMAN Security.
Since you’re on the c/side website, we acknowledge our bias. That said, we’ve built our case honestly and based our analysis on publicly available information, industry information, and our own or our customers' experiences.
If you want to verify their claims yourself, please navigate to their product pages.
| Criteria | c/side | Human Security |
|---|---|---|
| Approaches used | Proxy + agent based detections but also offers crawler and offers a free CSP reporting endpoint |
JS-Based Detection |
| Real-time Protection | ||
| Full Payload Analysis | ||
| Dynamic Threat Detection | ||
| DOM-Level Threat Detection | ||
| 100% Historical Tracking & Forensics | ||
| Bypass Protection | ||
| Certainty the Script Seen by User is Monitored | ||
| AI-driven Script Analysis | ||
| QSA validated PCI dash | ||
| SOC 2 Type II | ||
| PCI specific UI |
What is HUMAN Security Client-side Defense?
HUMAN Security started in the bots detection space, and are well known for creating very sophisticated and lauded tools to tackle those issues. They’ve since expanded and offer products in client-side and other spaces.
HUMAN Security announced a merger with PerimeterX in July of 2022. They were then backed by a $100 million debt facility from Blackstone Credit, a Private Equity firm.
Client-side Defense is part of Application Protection, a suite of solutions purpose-built to secure web and mobile applications from a range of cyberthreats. Pricing is not publicly available, and you need to be an existing Human Security customer in order to use Client-side Defense
How HUMAN Security Client-side Defense works
HUMAN’s Client-Side Defense works by embedding a JavaScript sensor directly into the website. This sensor runs in real user browsers and collects telemetry about all scripts executing on the page. It observes what scripts are loaded, what DOM elements they interact with, whether they access localStorage or cookies, and what outbound network connections they attempt to make.
While the script itself doesn’t need to change frequently, your site updates makes managing this sensor and ensuring it stays current across environments a tad cumbersome.
Because it relies on JavaScript embedded in the page, it can only act after the browser has begun rendering content. There is a window of exposure before malicious scripts are caught or blocked.
This approach can prevent known patterns of attacks, but new attacks will be hardly impossible to prevent unless previously set up.
How c/side goes further
c/side primarily offers a hybrid proxy approach which sits in between the user session and the 3rd party service. It analyzes the served dependencies code in real-time before serving it to the user.
This allows us to not only spot advanced highly targeted attacks and alert on them, c/side also makes it possible to block attacks before they touch the user's browser. It also checks the box for multiple compliance frameworks, including PCI DSS 4.0.1. We even provide deep forensics, including if an attacker bypasses our detections. Allowing you to more tightly scope the size of the incident us to make our detection capabilities better every day. No other vendor has this capability.
We believe this is the most secure way to monitor and protect your dependencies across your entire website. We've spent years in the client-side security space before we started c/side, we've seen it all, this is the only way you can actually spot an attack.
Sign up or book a demo to get started.
FAQ
Q: How does c/side's hybrid proxy differ from Human Security's browser-based monitoring?
A: The fundamental difference is protection location. Human Security (formerly PerimeterX) injects JavaScript monitoring code into browsers that watches for suspicious behavior after scripts have already loaded. c/side's hybrid proxy intercepts and analyzes scripts before they reach browsers, blocking malicious content at the network level. We provide proactive prevention, while Human Security offers reactive detection after scripts have already been delivered.
Q: Can attackers bypass c/side's protection like they can with Human Security's JavaScript traps?
A: No, because c/side's core analysis happens on our proxy, completely invisible to attackers. Human Security's monitoring code runs in browsers where sophisticated attackers can see it, reverse engineer it, and craft attacks specifically designed to avoid detection. Since c/side's proxy analysis happens server-side before content reaches browsers, attackers have no visibility into our security mechanisms and cannot study or circumvent our protection methods.
Q: What forensic evidence does c/side provide compared to Human Security's behavioral alerts?
A: Human Security provides behavioral monitoring data and alerts when suspicious activity is detected, but c/side captures and archives the complete malicious payloads that were blocked. This gives you forensic-grade evidence showing exactly what the attack code looked like and how it operated. Incident response teams get the actual attack code for analysis rather than just behavioral observations.
Q: How do compliance and audit capabilities compare between the two approaches?
A: c/side provides superior compliance documentation with immutable records of every script version and comprehensive audit trails. Human Security's behavioral monitoring provides detection logs but lacks the detailed forensic evidence that regulators require for thorough incident documentation. Our approach covers both PCI DSS requirements 6.4.3 and 11.6.1 with complete payload archives and security header tracking.
Q: Why is c/side's blocking approach better than Human Security's monitoring approach?
A: Blocking prevents attacks before any user data can be compromised, while monitoring only detects attacks after they've already executed and potentially stolen information. Human Security's approach means sensitive data can be exfiltrated before their monitoring system even triggers an alert. c/side ensures malicious scripts never reach browsers, providing guaranteed protection rather than post-incident detection.