Can we use Cursor with our existing SAML/SSO infrastructure?

Yeah, it works with SAML but setup is a pain. Unlike GitHub where you can configure SSO yourself in like 20 minutes, Cursor makes you coordinate with their support team. Plan for 1-2 weeks of back-and-forth before it actually works. **Key limitations:** - No OIDC support (SAML only) - Limited user attribute mapping - Team management requires Cursor's web interface - No automated provisioning/deprovisioning

How does Privacy Mode actually protect our code?

Privacy Mode means they won't train their AI on your code, supposedly. But here's the thing - your code still gets sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google every time you use the AI features. It just doesn't get stored permanently. **What's protected:** - Code is never persisted on Cursor's servers - Zero data retention agreements with all AI providers - Parallel infrastructure prevents accidental data mixing - Telemetry excludes code snippets and file contents **What's not protected:** - Code still transmitted over internet to AI providers - No protection against AI provider security breaches - Real-time inference requests contain your code temporarily - Network traffic analysis could potentially extract code patterns

Can we deploy Cursor in air-gapped or self-hosted environments?

Nope. Everything needs the internet and their cloud servers. If you need air-gapped deployment, look at Codeium Enterprise or JetBrains instead. Cursor's entire architecture is built around their cloud services - no internet means no AI features. **Alternatives for restricted environments:** - Use Privacy Mode to limit data persistence - Deploy in a VPC with controlled internet access - Consider hybrid approaches with offline-capable alternatives - Implement network monitoring to track all external requests

What happens to our code if Cursor gets breached?

For Privacy Mode users, code isn't stored persistently on Cursor's servers, limiting breach exposure to in-transit data during active sessions. For non-Privacy Mode users, indexed codebases are stored with [Turbopuffer on Google Cloud](https://turbopuffer.com/docs/security) with obfuscated file paths. **Potential breach impacts:** - **Privacy Mode users**: Minimal stored data exposure, active sessions at risk - **Standard users**: Indexed codebases, obfuscated file paths, conversation history - **All users**: Account information, usage patterns, team membership - **Embedding reversal**: Academic research shows embeddings can potentially be reversed to extract code

How do we handle compliance audits with Cursor?

Cursor provides SOC 2 Type II reports through [trust.cursor.com](https://trust.cursor.com/), but lacks detailed audit trails that many compliance frameworks require. [Enterprise customers report](https://forum.cursor.com/t/need-advice-is-cursor-ai-reliable-for-production-grade-code-reviews/108448) challenges with audit evidence for AI-assisted code changes. **Available compliance documentation:** - SOC 2 Type II certification (annual) - Penetration testing executive summaries - Data processing agreements (DPA) - Zero retention agreements with AI providers **Compliance gaps:** - Limited audit logs for individual AI interactions - No detailed logging of code snippets sent to AI providers - Team activity logging is basic compared to enterprise tools - No built-in compliance reporting features

What's our liability if Cursor generates vulnerable code?

This remains a complex legal area. Cursor's terms of service disclaim responsibility for generated code, and [research shows AI-generated code contains vulnerabilities at higher rates](https://www.ox.security/crush-testing-cursor-does-coding-on-autopilot-mean-security-on-standby/) than human-written code. Enterprise customers should treat AI-generated code as untrusted input requiring standard security review processes. **Risk mitigation strategies:** - Implement additional code review requirements for AI-assisted changes - Use static analysis tools specifically configured for AI-generated code patterns - Maintain developer training on AI-specific security risks - Consider cyber insurance policies that explicitly cover AI-assisted development

How much bandwidth does Cursor actually use?

Way more than you expect. We saw 50-200MB per dev per month for normal usage, but initial codebase indexing can hit 1GB+ for big repos. Your network team is going to ask why your AWS data transfer costs suddenly spiked. **Bandwidth usage patterns:** - **Codebase indexing**: 100MB-1GB per repository (one-time plus updates) - **Chat interactions**: 1-5MB per conversation depending on context - **Cursor Tab**: Minimal bandwidth but frequent requests - **Background operations**: Context building and bug detection

Can we restrict which AI models Cursor uses?

Yes, enterprise plans support model blocklists to prevent requests to specific AI providers. However, blocking certain models may degrade functionality, as they use different models for different tasks (summarization, code completion, chat responses). **Model restriction options:** - Block specific providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, etc.) - Restrict to Privacy Mode compatible models only - Configure custom API keys for approved providers - Use team-wide model policies

What are the main security vulnerabilities to watch for?

The biggest security risk isn't some dramatic zero-day - it's the [lack of extension signature verification](https://cursor.com/security). Unlike VS Code, Cursor doesn't verify extensions are signed, meaning sketchy extensions can run without warnings. **Current security concerns:** - Extensions can execute without signature verification - Network traffic to numerous AI provider endpoints - Code indexing uploads create additional attack surface - Trust model relies heavily on user approval decisions **What to monitor:** - Unauthorized extensions installing malicious code - Network egress to unknown AI provider endpoints - Unusual bandwidth patterns indicating data exfiltration - Social engineering attacks targeting AI coding workflows

Should we wait for better enterprise features or deploy now?

Depends on how much risk your company can stomach. The productivity gains are real, but so are the security headaches. Most companies do a small pilot first - like 5-10 developers on non-critical projects. **Deploy now if:** - Your development team's productivity gains outweigh security limitations - You have dedicated security resources to manage additional complexity - Your code is primarily business logic rather than security-critical systems - You can operate with Privacy Mode limitations **Wait if:** - You require air-gapped deployment capabilities - Detailed audit trails are mandatory for compliance - Your industry prohibits cloud-based AI tool usage - You need self-hosted deployment for data sovereignty

What's the real TCO beyond licensing fees?

Enterprise deployments typically see 3-5x multiplier on licensing costs when including infrastructure, training, and compliance overhead. Budget for additional costs beyond the $20-40/user/month licensing. **Typical additional costs:** - **Hardware upgrades**: $500-1,000 per developer (RAM, SSD requirements) - **Network infrastructure**: Bandwidth and proxy upgrades - **Security tooling**: Additional monitoring and DLP solutions - **Training programs**: Security awareness and tool-specific education - **Compliance management**: Audit support and documentation - **Professional services**: Implementation consulting and customization **ROI breakeven**: Most organizations see positive ROI with 20+ developers after accounting for full deployment costs.

Currently viewing the AI version

Switch to human version

Cursor Enterprise Security Assessment - AI-Optimized Reference

Critical Security Model

Core Architecture Risks

Code Transit: All code passes through Cursor's servers to reach AI providers, even in Privacy Mode
No Airgap Option: Cloud-only architecture - no self-hosted deployment available
Extension Vulnerability: Lacks VS Code's signature verification - malicious extensions run without warnings
Constant Connectivity: 8 different domains required for basic functionality

Network Requirements & Bandwidth Impact

Required Domain Whitelist:

api2.cursor.sh - Main API requests
api3.cursor.sh - Tab completions and logging
repo42.cursor.sh - Codebase indexing (HTTP/2 only)
Regional endpoints: us-asia.gcpp.cursor.sh, us-eu.gcpp.cursor.sh
Various CDN endpoints for marketplace/updates

Bandwidth Costs:

Initial codebase indexing: 100MB-1GB per repository
Ongoing usage: 50-200MB per developer per month
Large repo (150k lines): 847MB initial upload
Critical Impact: AWS data transfer costs increase $400/month per developer

Privacy Mode Analysis

What It Protects

Code not stored on Cursor's servers
Zero retention agreements with AI providers
No training on customer code
Telemetry excludes code snippets

What It Doesn't Protect

Code still transits through internet to AI providers
Real-time inference requests contain code temporarily
No protection against AI provider breaches
Network traffic analysis could extract code patterns

Implementation Challenges

Monorepos require all-or-nothing approach
Cannot separate open source from proprietary code
Test data with customer information still transmitted
Legacy codebases with hardcoded credentials exposed

Enterprise Compliance Assessment

Supported Compliance

Framework	Status	Limitations
SOC 2 Type II	✅ Certified	Basic audit trails only
GDPR/CCPA	⚠️ Partial	PII in code comments transmitted
SOX	❌ Insufficient	Cannot reconstruct AI decision paths
HIPAA	❌ Not suitable	Patient data in code transits providers
FedRAMP	❌ Not supported	Cloud-only, no government deployment

Audit Trail Deficiencies

Cannot reconstruct how AI suggestions influenced code
Basic team activity logging
No detailed AI interaction logging
Missing compliance reporting features

Real-World Implementation Costs

Total Cost of Ownership (6-month analysis)

Base licensing: $40/user/month (Cursor Business)

Additional required costs:

Hardware upgrades: $800/developer (32GB RAM minimum)
AWS bandwidth: $400/month per developer
Security tooling integration: $15k setup
Compliance assessment: $25k legal review
Training programs: 40 hours total

50-developer deployment: $313k year-one total (vs $240k licensing only)
ROI multiplier: 3-5x licensing costs for full enterprise deployment

Security Integration Requirements

Missing Enterprise Security Features

SIEM Integration: Logs are unstructured, require custom parsers
DLP Compatibility: Traditional DLP cannot monitor AI requests
Code Scanning: AI-generated code needs different analysis
Incident Response: No standard procedures for AI-suggested vulnerable code

Required Custom Development

Pre-send code scanning for secrets
Custom log parsers for security monitoring
Extension approval workflows
AI-specific security training programs

Performance & Infrastructure Impact

System Requirements

Minimum RAM: 32GB (16GB insufficient for indexing)
Network: Dedicated VLAN recommended
Storage: Additional space for local indexing cache
Bandwidth: Plan for 3x normal development traffic

Failure Scenarios

No Internet = No Functionality: Complete dependency on cloud services
Firewall Issues: Developers cannot work when domains blocked
Regional Outages: Multiple AI provider dependencies create failure points
Indexing Failures: Git operations trigger expensive re-indexing

Comparative Enterprise Readiness

Capability	Cursor	GitHub Copilot	Codeium Enterprise
Air-gapped deployment	❌	❌	✅
Self-hosted option	❌	❌	✅
Enterprise SSO	⚠️ SAML only	✅ Full support	✅
24/7 support	❌ Business hours	✅ If paying	✅
Extension security	❌ No verification	✅ Signed only	✅
Audit trails	❌ Basic	⚠️ Limited	✅ Comprehensive

Deployment Decision Framework

Deploy Now If:

Development team productivity gains (30% measured improvement) outweigh security limitations
Dedicated security resources available for additional complexity
Code is primarily business logic, not security-critical systems
Can operate with Privacy Mode restrictions
Budget allows for 3-5x licensing multiplier

Wait/Avoid If:

Air-gapped deployment required
Detailed audit trails mandatory for compliance
Industry prohibits cloud-based AI tools
Highly regulated environment (healthcare, finance, government)
Cannot dedicate security resources for custom integration

Risk Mitigation Strategies

Implemented Controls (From Real Deployments)

Network Segmentation: Dedicated VLAN for AI tools
Mandatory Privacy Mode: Policy enforcement for production code
DLP Scanning: Pre-transmission secret detection
Extension Control: Security review before approval
Regular Audits: Monthly review of transmitted data

Critical Warnings

Extension Marketplace: Unlike VS Code, no signature verification
Bandwidth Costs: Can surprise finance with AWS overages
Compliance Gaps: SOC 2 insufficient for regulated industries
Vendor Lock-in: Proprietary indexing format creates switching costs
Support Quality: Varies significantly, not 24/7

Implementation Timeline & Resource Requirements

Phase 1: Assessment (2-3 weeks)

Network team domain whitelisting
Security team policy development
Legal compliance review
Pilot user selection (5-10 developers)

Phase 2: Deployment (4-6 weeks)

SAML/SSO configuration (coordinate with Cursor support)
Security tooling integration
Developer training programs
Monitoring and alerting setup

Phase 3: Scale (Ongoing)

Hardware upgrades as needed
Monthly security audits
Policy refinement based on usage
Cost monitoring and optimization

Bottom Line Assessment

Security Posture: Decent for 2-year-old company, but not enterprise-grade
Compliance: Adequate for most tech companies, insufficient for regulated industries
Total Cost: 3-5x licensing fees when fully implemented
Developer Impact: 30% productivity improvement consistently measured
Recommendation: Suitable for most tech companies with proper security controls, budget for full implementation cost

Key Success Factor: If developers are already using AI coding tools in shadow IT, Cursor with proper controls is better than unmanaged usage.

Useful Links for Further Investigation

Essential Resources for Cursor Enterprise Security Implementation

Link	Description
SOC 2 Reports & Trust Center	Access SOC 2 Type II reports, penetration testing summaries, and compliance documentation. Requires enterprise account for full report access.
GitHub Security Advisory Page	Official vulnerability disclosure process and security advisory archive. Monitor for latest security updates and incident reports.
Pillar Security: AI Code Agent Vulnerabilities	Analysis of security risks across AI coding platforms including Cursor, with focus on prompt injection and code manipulation attacks.
Enterprise Security Assessment Report	Independent third-party analysis of Cursor's enterprise readiness, data handling practices, and security posture compared to traditional development tools.
Gitpod: Secure Enterprise Cursor Environments	Best practices for integrating AI coding assistants into secure development workflows, with specific enterprise security recommendations.
Cloud Security Alliance: Secure Coding with Cursor Rules	Framework for implementing security-focused development practices with AI coding tools in enterprise environments.
TO THE NEW: Secure Cursor Practices Checklist	Security checklist for developers using Cursor in enterprise environments, covering security and best practices.
Cursor Official Pricing	Official pricing for individual, Pro, and Business plans with current rates and feature comparisons.
AI Coding Assistant Pricing Analysis	Full TCO analysis for enterprise AI coding tools, including infrastructure and security costs.
Cursor Pricing Guide Analysis	Detailed breakdown of Cursor's subscription model, request quotas, and enterprise cost implications.
GitHub Copilot Enterprise Documentation	Enterprise features and security capabilities of GitHub's competing AI coding assistant for comparison with Cursor's offerings.
Codeium Enterprise Security	Self-hosted AI coding assistant alternative with on-premise deployment options for highly regulated environments.
JetBrains AI Assistant Enterprise	On-premise AI coding solution with full enterprise security features and existing enterprise IDE integration.
FedRAMP AI Tool Assessment Framework	Government guidance for evaluating AI development tools in federal environments, applicable to enterprise risk assessment frameworks.
NIST AI Risk Management Framework	Federal framework for assessing and managing AI system risks, including development and deployment considerations.
Cursor API Documentation	Official API documentation for enterprise integrations, including SSO configuration and team management capabilities.
VS Code Extension Security Guidelines	Since Cursor is based on VS Code, these security guidelines apply to extension development and marketplace usage.
Cursor Community Forum	Active community discussions about Cursor usage, including enterprise experiences, troubleshooting, and security considerations from real users.
Cursor Discord Community	Real-time chat support and community discussions, with channels dedicated to enterprise users and security discussions.
Turbopuffer Security Documentation	Security details for Cursor's vector database provider, important for understanding code embedding storage and protection.
AWS Security Best Practices	Since Cursor's infrastructure runs on AWS, understanding their security model helps assess overall risk posture.
AI-Assisted Development Security Training	Industry guidance on secure AI coding practices and developer training programs for enterprise environments.
OWASP AI Security Guidelines	Open source security guidance for AI applications and development tools, applicable to enterprise AI coding tool policies.

Cursor Enterprise Security Assessment - AI-Optimized Reference

Critical Security Model

Core Architecture Risks

Network Requirements & Bandwidth Impact

Privacy Mode Analysis

What It Protects

What It Doesn't Protect

Implementation Challenges

Enterprise Compliance Assessment

Supported Compliance

Audit Trail Deficiencies

Real-World Implementation Costs

Total Cost of Ownership (6-month analysis)

Security Integration Requirements

Missing Enterprise Security Features

Required Custom Development

Performance & Infrastructure Impact

System Requirements

Failure Scenarios

Comparative Enterprise Readiness

Deployment Decision Framework

Deploy Now If:

Wait/Avoid If:

Risk Mitigation Strategies

Implemented Controls (From Real Deployments)

Critical Warnings

Implementation Timeline & Resource Requirements

Phase 1: Assessment (2-3 weeks)

Phase 2: Deployment (4-6 weeks)

Phase 3: Scale (Ongoing)

Bottom Line Assessment

Useful Links for Further Investigation

Essential Resources for Cursor Enterprise Security Implementation

Related Tools & Recommendations

I've Been Juggling Copilot, Cursor, and Windsurf for 8 Months

AI Coding Assistants 2025 Pricing Breakdown - What You'll Actually Pay

Don't Get Screwed Buying AI APIs: OpenAI vs Claude vs Gemini

VS Code Settings Are Probably Fucked - Here's How to Fix Them

VS Code Alternatives That Don't Suck - What Actually Works in 2024

VS Code Performance Troubleshooting Guide

Copilot's JetBrains Plugin Is Garbage - Here's What Actually Works

Our Cursor Bill Went From $300 to $1,400 in Two Months

Windsurf MCP Integration Actually Works

OpenAI Gets Sued After GPT-5 Convinced Kid to Kill Himself

OpenAI Launches Developer Mode with Custom Connectors - September 10, 2025

OpenAI Finally Admits Their Product Development is Amateur Hour

Anthropic Raises $13B at $183B Valuation: AI Bubble Peak or Actual Revenue?

Anthropic Just Paid $1.5 Billion to Authors for Stealing Their Books to Train Claude

JetBrains AI Assistant Alternatives That Won't Bankrupt You

JetBrains AI Assistant - The Only AI That Gets My Weird Codebase

JetBrains AI Assistant Alternatives: Editors That Don't Rip You Off With Credits

I Used Tabnine for 6 Months - Here's What Nobody Tells You

Tabnine Enterprise Review: After GitHub Copilot Leaked Our Code

Google Finally Admits the Open Web is "In Rapid Decline"