ZipLoom vs Rafter
Rafter guards the agent while it writes. ZipLoom gates the deploy and runs the app.
Rafter and ZipLoom sell to the same person — someone shipping software written largely by an AI agent — but they intervene at different moments. Rafter sits inside the agent's loop: a local CLI and MCP server that scans for secrets, intercepts destructive shell commands before the agent runs them, and enforces a policy file committed to the repo. ZipLoom sits at the deploy boundary: it scans the code and the live app, blocks the release when something critical is found, ships it to your platform, and keeps it healthy afterwards.
Where Rafter is stronger
Every tool on this page is here because it's good at something. These are the reasons to pick Rafter over us, written by us:
- The local layer is free, MIT-licensed, works offline, and needs no account — genuinely hard to argue with, and we don't have an equivalent.
- Command interception is a real capability we don't offer: it can block a destructive shell command before the agent executes it, which protects you during development rather than at deploy time.
- Installation into nine agents (Claude Code, Cursor, Windsurf, Aider, Cline and others) puts it where the code is being written. If your risk is what the agent does on your machine, that's the right place to be.
- Findings are written to paste straight into an AI agent, and reviewers consistently praise that output format.
Who each one suits
- Your main worry is what an AI agent does on your machine while coding — destructive commands, secrets written to disk.
- You want something free, local, and offline with no account.
- You deploy through an existing pipeline you're happy with and only want a security layer.
- Your worry is what happens once the app is public — open database rows, leaked keys in the bundle, a bad release staying live overnight.
- You want the scan, the deploy, and the monitoring in one place rather than a scanner plus a separate pipeline.
- You want a flat price rather than paying per deep scan.
Side by side
| Outcome | ZipLoom | Rafter |
|---|---|---|
| Where it intervenes | At the deploy boundary and on the live app | Inside the coding agent's loop, on your machine |
| Blocks a risky shell command before it runs | No | Yes — risk-tiered command interception |
| Blocks a release when a critical issue is found | Yes — the deploy is gated | No — reports findings; shipping is elsewhere |
| Checks the live deployed app | Yes — headers, TLS, DNS, exposed endpoints | Remote engine scans code; site audits on higher tiers |
| Row-level security on your database | Yes, per table | Not a documented check |
| Ships the app | Yes — 10 platforms, with rollback and self-healing | No |
| Works offline / no account | No | Yes, for the local layer |
| Deep scan cost | Included in the flat price | Metered — roughly $5–6 per agentic 'Plus Scan' |
What it costs
The verdict
These are complementary more often than they're rivals. Rafter protects you while the agent writes; ZipLoom decides whether the result is fit to be public and keeps it running. If you can only have one and you already have a deploy pipeline you trust, Rafter's free local layer is an easy yes. If your app is going in front of real users and nothing currently stands between a bad release and production, that's the gap ZipLoom fills.
Assessed against published pricing and documentation as of 22 September 2026, plus hands-on use where noted. Prices change — follow the source links before relying on a number.
- Re-verify Rafter's current Plus Scan price and tier structure before launch — our figure is from an August 2026 capture
- Confirm the command-interception description still matches their current CLI
- Decide whether to publish the ZipLoom scan result Rafter produced on our own repo (85.2/100) as evidence of an honest read