AI PAYMENT SECURITY LIBRARY
Answers for every team between an AI agent and a payment.
Use-case playbooks, threat explanations, protocol guides and machine-readable integration resources.
FREE INTERACTIVE TOOLS
Get an answer, artifact or action plan
Useful without an account. Built to move a real architecture decision forward, not merely to collect an email address.
Prove signed purchase authority
Generate an ephemeral key, sign a purchase and independently verify the portable decision receipt.
Run the proof →3-MINUTE ASSESSMENTScore the payment boundary
Answer ten control questions and copy a prioritized security report.
Assess risk →MANDATE BUILDERGenerate testable purchase authority
Create fresh AP2, TAP, UCP, x402, ACP or custom JSON and run it live.
Build a mandate →LIVE ATTACK LABAttack a purchase five ways
Test overspend, seller substitution, expiry, consent and prompt injection.
Run live checks →EMBEDDABLE DISCLOSUREShow the payment boundary
Add an accessible disclosure badge to a protected checkout or integration guide.
Get badge code →DECISION COMPARISONS
Choose the right layer and protocol
AI-agent payment authority vs. direct-debit mandates
MandateShield protects delegated AI purchases. It is not SEPA mandate collection, direct-debit processing, electronic signature or bank-payment software.
Compare →CONTROL COMPARISONAI payment authorization vs. fraud detection
Fraud tools ask whether a payment looks suspicious. Agent-authorization controls ask whether the person permitted this exact autonomous purchase.
Compare →PROTOCOL COMPARISONAP2 vs. TAP vs. x402 for agent payments
AP2, Visa Trusted Agent Protocol and x402 solve different layers of agentic commerce. A payment boundary can normalize the facts needed for execution-time authority.
Compare →ARCHITECTURE DECISIONBuild vs. buy AI payment guardrails
A homegrown rule can compare an amount. A production execution boundary must also normalize protocols, fail closed, stop replay and preserve explainable evidence.
Compare →SOLUTIONS
Execution controls by operating model
Payment guardrails for autonomous AI agents
Add deterministic spending, merchant, consent and replay controls to an AI agent before it executes a payment.
Read solution →Ecommerce merchantsAccept AI-agent orders without trusting the model
Verify autonomous checkout totals, merchant identity and user-approved limits before creating a charge.
Read solution →MarketplacesPolicy enforcement for multi-merchant agent checkout
Control seller substitution, price drift and replay across marketplace purchases initiated by AI agents.
Read solution →Payment providersPre-authorization control for agentic payments
Add user-mandate enforcement before payment processing, alongside existing fraud and risk systems.
Read solution →Fintech and complianceExplainable controls for autonomous transaction authority
Produce deterministic AI-payment decisions, reason codes and minimal receipts for operational oversight.
Read solution →THREAT LIBRARY
Failures to stop before money moves
Stop AI-agent overspend before payment
Enforce a hard maximum against the final amount, including checkout changes, fees and currency boundaries.
Read threat guide →Merchant substitutionPrevent merchant substitution in agentic checkout
Bind an autonomous purchase to the intended seller or approved merchant scope before execution.
Read threat guide →Payment prompt injectionContain prompt injection at the payment boundary
Detect instruction-override signals and enforce deterministic payment policy outside the AI model.
Read threat guide →Payment replay attacksBlock duplicate autonomous payment execution
Consume each payment decision once with durable idempotency and reject sequential or concurrent replay.
Read threat guide →Consent driftKeep AI purchases inside current user consent
Reject missing, stale or weakly bound authority when checkout facts change after the user delegates a purchase.
Read threat guide →FOR DEVELOPERS AND AI SYSTEMS