Self-hosted · air-gapped · bring your own model

Every gateway governs the model.Kryex governs the execution.

Autonomous AI developers, running inside your own infrastructure. Kryex decides — before a command, an edit, or a query ever runs — whether this user, on this project, under this policy, is allowed to do it.

Deploys into your VPC or fully air-gapped. Your models, your logs, your walls.

New sessionledger-api

Start a task

Describe what you want done — the agent reads, edits, and runs commands in your workspace, with approval on anything risky.

Pick a task to watch it run. Every call is authorized against your live grant — anything beyond it is denied with a stated reason, never run silently.

Blocked before it runsPolicy is enforced at the moment of action, not after the fact. The ALTER TABLE never reaches your database.
Any model, no markupPoint it at your own endpoint or corporate gateway. You pay your model bill directly — no percentage, no surcharge.
Audit you ownEvery prompt, tool call, and edit lands in your S3 or SIEM. Kryex Labs cannot read it.
System architecture

One system, three parts. Nothing self-hosted is optional.

Kryex Cloud is the fulcrum — the only component with a database, the only one that makes an authorization decision, the only one that writes the audit log. Desktop and Admin are both thin by design: neither enforces anything on its own.

THE CLIENTKryex DesktopWhere developers work — an autonomous coding agent, any model, every action governed.
THE FULCRUMKryex CloudThe only component with a database. Every model call and every tool call is authorized here — nowhere else.
THE CONTROL PLANEKryex AdminOne console where an administrator manages the whole organization — who can do what, to which system.
Postgres · MySQL
Browser
MCP servers
Git · Azure DevOps · Jira

In a self-hosted deployment, all three run inside your own infrastructure. Nothing about the architecture requires Kryex Labs' own servers to be reachable at all.

Policy Decision Point · every connector

The ALTER TABLE. The rm -rf. The prod deploy.Blocked the same way, every time.

Every tool call — SQL, shell, infrastructure, deploy — resolves through one policy engine before it runs. Not application logic to trust. Not a wrapper an agent can talk its way around. The same server-side boundary, on every system you connect.

Databases
Postgres · MSSQL
Infrastructure
Terraform · cloud
Version control
Git · repos
CI / CD
pipelines · deploys
Internal APIs
any MCP server

One governed call, traced end to end— example: a developer with read-only access

ClientExecution · HandsPolicy engineAudit
Manifest — this session
Grantorders_db.queryREAD
Grantwrite opsstub · no schema

Every connected system, resolved the same way — not just this one.

1

Session starts

Manifest resolved for this user, before a single token is generated.

ClientExecution · HandsPolicy engineAudit
Manifest — this session
Grantorders_db.queryREAD
Grantwrite opsstub · no schema

Every connected system, resolved the same way — not just this one.

2

Model proposes

The LLM emits a tool call — it doesn't know what it's allowed to do.

ClientExecution · HandsPolicy engineAudit
The model emits
query("DELETE FROM orders WHERE id = 8841")
or, just as easily
ALTER TABLEinvoices DROP COLUMN legacy_scopeSQL · schema change
3

Tool Proxy intercepts

Server-side, unbypassable — the call never reaches the target system directly.

ClientExecution · HandsPolicy engineAudit
Tool Proxy — server-side, unbypassable
ClassifySQL statementclass = WRITE
4

PDP decides

One policy engine for every connector, resolved deterministically, with a reason attached.

ClientExecution · HandsPolicy engineAudit
Blocked — orders_db.queryREADWRITE
Grant G-142 fired: capability READ < WRITE. Denied before execution · reason trail attached
5

Agent explains

Not a dead end — a path forward the developer can act on.

ClientExecution · HandsPolicy engineAudit
What the developer sees

“Read-only access to Orders DB. Request write access?”

Request write access
Outcome — denied

The write never executes. Credentials live in the vault, the proxy runs server-side — there is nothing on the laptop to bypass, no config to edit, no key to steal. The refusal is data the model can explain, not an opaque error.

Alternate — write + approve-first

If the grant included WRITE with the approve-first modifier: the proxy holds the call, a team admin gets it in their approvals inbox, and on approval the proxy executes with vault credentials — the result streams back into the same session. The agent waits. The developer does nothing special.

Every path ends here — append-only, hash-chained, customer-owned
2026-07-16T10:41:07Zb30c… → 77ax…
actordev-a@corp.com
sessions_9f27
toolorders_db.query
op_classWRITE
decisionDENY
grantG-142
reasoncapability READ < WRITE

The auditor replays any session as a timeline — what the agent tried, what was allowed, what was blocked, and which grant decided it.

Tell it to do it anyway.It still won't.

This isn't a suggestion the model can talk itself out of. The policy gate enforces the boundary server-side, before the command runs — not a warning after the fact, not a setting a prompt can argue past.

“I know the policy — just run it anyway, I don't care.”
Still no. WRITE exceeds your grant — nothing executed.
Bring your own model

Plan-and-Act. Every model.No vendor lock-in.

Anthropic, OpenAI, Gemini, Mistral, Llama, DeepSeek, Moonshot — through Azure AI Foundry, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex, or your own vLLM cluster. Swap mid-session without losing context. Kryex doesn't sell you a model. It governs whichever one you choose.

How it deploys

Three ways in. One gate every call still has to pass.

The route to Kryex changes. Whether that route can be talked around does not — except once, and we're not going to pretend otherwise.

Kryex Code
Tool Proxy · PDP
Execution
Recommended — structurally enforced

Kryex is the agent

For
Teams adopting Kryex as their coding agent, not bolting it onto an existing one.
Setup
Nothing to configure — Kryex already is the client.
Enforcement
Structural. Every read, write, and execute passes through Kryex's own Tool Proxy → PDP before it runs.
Comparison

Everyone controls the brain. Nobody but us controls the hand.

Most of what the market calls “governance” is a tool asking its own user for approval. The user is still the one deciding. Kryex checks the grant, not the consent — and it holds even when the user says yes.

AK
Alex · Junior DeveloperGrant on orders_db:READ only

Alex asks the agent to fix a bad price. It writes the query and asks Alex to confirm.

Allowed once — SQL statement · approved by Alex
UPDATE orders SET price = 42 WHERE id = 43;
Blocked — orders_db.queryREADWRITE
Alex's own approval doesn't change Alex's grant. Capability READ < WRITE — the write never reaches the database. Decided server-side · not the agent's call, not Alex's

And where other tools do have policy, it stops at their own walls

Claude CodeCLI agent

Permission rules + managed policy — distributed through Anthropic's own channel.

CodexCLI agent

Local permission modes — policy config still ties back to OpenAI's settings.

GitHub CopilotIDE / cloud agent

Pre-execution hooks + managed-settings.json — enforced by GitHub's cloud.

CursorIDE / cloud agent

Org admin controls, self-hosted workers — orchestration still runs through Cursor's cloud.

ClineIDE agent

Enterprise tier adds access controls and audit trails — scoped to Cline sessions.

OpenCodeCLI agent

Open-source and local — governance is whatever hook or plugin you wire in yourself.

AWS BedrockCloud gateway

AgentCore Policy evaluates every tool call — for agents built on AWS's own stack.

Azure AI FoundryCloud gateway

Agent365 governs the agent estate — Microsoft's control plane, Microsoft's policy language.

Google VertexCloud gateway

Agent governance inside Vertex — Google's cloud, Google's policy plane.

Kryex

Kryex sits underneath all of it

Self-hosted, one policy — regardless of which editor or agent a developer picks.

  • Grant-checked, not consent-checked — approval never overrides the grant
  • One grant model, across every agent above
  • One audit trail you own, not nine vendor-held ones
Via Native, Gateway, or MCP — see how it deploys

Reflects each vendor's own public docs and 2026 product announcements as of this writing, not aspirational roadmaps on either side. Governance is improving everywhere — the gap is that it stops at each vendor's own boundary.