Lakera Guard alternative for air-gapped networks

Yes, according to the air-gapped path described for Lakera Guard, which needs an Enterprise license and container exports pulled from Check Point's registry. Confirm the exact terms, support scope and renewal conditions in writing with Check Point or your Lakera account team, since the license cost recurs with the contract. An open-source path changes that line item: NeMo Guardrails is Apache 2.0 licensed and Guardrails AI is Apache-2.0 licensed, so the software itself carries no license fee. You still pay for the hardware or cloud capacity that runs your detection models, the engineering work to configure and test the rails, and any commercial model licenses you choose to add. Ask your legal team to review the component licenses of every model you plan to bring across the boundary, because open-source code and open-weight models often carry different terms.

The main drivers are the number of applications and traffic paths that need screening, the detection models you run locally, the size of your red-team test set, and how many environments (development, staging, production, and any isolated enclave) you must replicate. Costs fall into one-time work, including architecture, rail design, integration, hardening and documentation, and recurring work, including model refreshes, rule updates, regression testing and support. Hardware is another driver: detection models can run on CPU or GPU, and the choice depends on latency targets and request volume, so benchmark it on your own traffic. When requesting a quote, ask for a written scope that lists systems in scope, the rails and models to be delivered, the test cases, the handover documents and what is excluded. A fixed-scope agreement makes these items visible before work starts.

The duration depends on the number of integration points, how many detection models must be transferred and validated, the state of your isolated network, and the amount of testing your risk owners require. No public figure applies to your environment, so ask for a timeline in the written scope rather than relying on a generic estimate. Plan separately for the transfer process itself. Every package, container image and model file crossing into the isolated boundary needs a verification step, which supports the software integrity and authenticity expectations in NERC CIP-013-2 if you operate under that standard. Also allow time for a side-by-side comparison on recorded traffic before enforcement is switched on. Ask the implementation partner to show which phases run in parallel and which depend on a change window in your environment.

Expect your engineers to provide access to the isolated environment, approve the software and model intake process, supply representative application traffic, and own the change process after handover. The platform side needs people who can run Kubernetes or a container host in the enclave, manage a private registry, and operate a model server. The application side needs developers who can call an HTTP guardrail endpoint, handle a block or flag verdict, and log the outcome. Security staff must define which risks to enforce, which to monitor, and which exceptions require approval. Python skills matter because NeMo Guardrails configurations combine config.yml files, optional Python actions and Colang files, and Guardrails AI validators are installed and chained in Python. Confirm with the implementation partner which of these skills you will need in-house and which will be delivered and documented.

Many teams with mature platform and security engineering can do it internally, especially if they already operate Kubernetes, private registries and self-hosted services in disconnected networks. A partner adds the most value when you lack that experience, when a compliance review requires documented evidence, or when you need an independent red-team exercise to test the rails. Internal teams should be honest about four tasks: building and validating the offline model and package set, writing and reviewing rail configurations, keeping test suites current as applications change, and handling false positives without weakening controls. If you choose a partner, DeployOpen plans, implements, hardens, documents and supports self-hosted open-source platforms inside your own infrastructure, including air-gapped networks, and most engagements are fixed-scope with agreed deliverables. Ongoing support and continuous testing are available as retainers.

Updates arrive as a controlled import, not as a live download. Your team or partner pulls approved releases of NeMo Guardrails or Guardrails AI, their validators and the detection models on an connected staging system, scans and verifies them, then carries them across the boundary on approved media. Security Onion's documentation shows the general pattern of applying newer ISO media in airgap mode, and Wazuh can use an offline vulnerability repository, which illustrates how other security platforms handle the same problem. For guardrails, plan a regression run against your recorded traffic before each import, because a new model version can change verdicts. Keep the previous version available for rollback. Ask the implementation partner to document the update procedure, the approval roles and the rollback steps. Confirm also whether the validators you need are published on Guardrails Hub and whether they install from a package set you can mirror.

Red-team testing checks whether the rails stop the attacks you care about and whether they wrongly block legitimate use. It typically covers prompt injection and jailbreak attempts, attempts to extract sensitive data, harmful content requests, and attacks delivered through retrieved documents or tool outputs. The work produces a test set, a record of verdicts, a list of bypasses and false positives, and fixes that are retested. Open-source tools such as promptfoo can help measure detection before and after a switch, and DeployOpen runs application, API, AI system and agent security testing, including red teaming, under a written scope. Results should show the test cases, the model and rail versions used and the decisions made, so they can support a security review. Note that a red-team exercise does not certify the system. Independent auditors and certification bodies issue those assessments, and DeployOpen prepares the evidence for them.

Reviewers usually want a current inventory of components with versions and licenses, a record of how each artifact was verified before entry, the architecture showing the isolated boundary and data flows, the rail and policy configurations under version control, and test results linked to specific versions. They also look for documented access control, logging of guardrail verdicts, and a tested rollback procedure. Some frameworks expect controls for remote access, such as NERC CIP-005-7, which requires remote access to high and medium impact BES Cyber Systems to pass through an Intermediate System with encryption and multi-factor authentication. If your environment falls under a regime such as CMMC, confirm its applicability with your assessor, since the scope rules in 32 CFR Part 170 determine which systems count. DeployOpen prepares the systems, controls and evidence for compliance assessments, but independent auditors issue any attestation or certification.