Compare

Forkbench vs Infisical Agent Proxy

Infisical Agent Proxy, generally available since 30 July 2026, is a secrets broker you deploy: agents point HTTPS_PROXY at it, and it swaps the dummy credential the agent holds for the real one before the request leaves for its destination.

Updated

Infisical Agent Proxy is infrastructure: you deploy it, agents route their requests through it, and it swaps a dummy credential for the real one at the network boundary. Forkbench is the Mac app the agents run in, where a key belongs to one Thread alongside its plan, its notes and its people.

These two agree on the conclusion and disagree about where it belongs. Infisical's own framing is that the agent proxy "represents a new kind of infrastructure primitive, alongside sandboxes", and they have built it as infrastructure: deploy it beside the agent or standalone for a whole network, on any operating system, self-hosted if you want. Forkbench is not infrastructure. It is the Mac app the agents are already running in, which is what lets the key be scoped to the piece of work rather than to the machine identity that fetched it.

ForkbenchInfisical Agent Proxy
What it isA Mac app where your agents run, one Thread per piece of workA secrets broker you deploy, part of the Infisical platform
Where it sitsIn the app the agent runs inBetween the agent and the internet: local, or standalone for a network
What a grant is scoped toA Thread: its keys, its notes, its board and its peopleA machine identity, and its project and environment
A key aimed at the wrong hostBlocked and logged; the destination is set when the key is createdNot published
Folder scope the kernel enforcesYes, per Thread, inherited by every process a shell spawnsNot part of it: the boundary it draws is the network
SetupInstall the appDeploy the proxy, point HTTPS_PROXY at it, hold identities in Infisical
Where it runsmacOS 13+macOS, Windows, Linux; also a Docker container
Self-hosting and sourceClosed, and there is nothing to hostMIT core, self-hostable; Agent Vault is MIT on GitHub
The work itselfA board and notes that outlive the session, shared with the people on the ThreadNot what it does; it brokers the credential
PriceFree; Pro €30/mo; Team $30/seat, dropping to $20 at scaleFree tier includes Agent Proxy for static secrets; Pro $20/identity/mo annual; Advanced $40

Where Infisical Agent Proxy is strong

  • It serves a fleet. A standalone deployment "runs on a host of its own and serves agents across your network", which is a thing a Mac app is not trying to be.
  • It is free on every tier for static secrets. In their launch release: "included across all pricing tiers, including the complimentary tier. No upgrades, enablement, or additional purchases are required." Dynamic secrets through the proxy need Advanced or Enterprise.
  • Cross-platform and self-hostable. The CLI runs on macOS, Windows and Linux, the proxy also ships as a Docker container, and the core platform is MIT.
  • Agent Vault, the open-source predecessor it grew out of, is on GitHub under MIT with more than 2,000 stars and is still maintained, so you can read the mechanism rather than take it on trust.
  • There is a full secrets platform underneath it: machine identities, projects and environments, dynamic secrets, 30-plus integration presets. If your problem is company-wide secrets management, that is what Infisical is for and Forkbench is not.

Where Forkbench differs

  • The grant is a piece of work, not a machine identity. A Thread holds its own plan, its own notes, its own keys and its own people, so what an agent may reach is decided by the job it was put on, and everything outside that Thread is deny by default.
  • Put the key in Vault and the command that needs it receives the value while the agent receives the result, so the key stays out of the prompt, the command line and the transcript. It is containment rather than a guarantee: a command you authorised can still print what it was handed. Vault is part of Pro.
  • A key is locked to its destination when it is created, and an agent cannot change that later. Forkbench restricts which hosts a key may reach, and blocks and logs the rest.
  • Folders the macOS kernel enforces. A Thread can be locked to the folders the job is about, applied as each shell starts and inherited by every process it spawns, so a build script and a dependency's install hook are inside the same boundary.
  • Nothing to deploy, and nothing else to run. The keys, the notes the agent reads and the board it claims work from are all one Thread's, on the Mac where the agent already is.

The bottom line

If the agents you are worried about run on servers, in containers or across a team, Infisical is the right shape and Forkbench is the wrong one: deploy the proxy, self-host the platform, and get it free on the tier you are already on. If the agents you are worried about run on your own Mac, the question stops being how a credential is brokered, because both answers are good, and becomes which job a credential belongs to. That is what a Thread decides, and it decides the notes, the board and the people in the same breath.

Infisical Agent Proxy questions

Keep reading

Sources

Comparison based on publicly available information, checked on the date above. Spot something out of date? Tell us.