Wiz found it. Tamnoon refuses, or proves it safe and closes it.

Self-healing infrastructure restores desired state: a pod restarts, an instance is replaced, a group scales back up. It is availability automation and it exercises no judgment about safety. Tamnoon heals the security posture instead: it investigates the finding in context, decides whether a change is safe to make at all, refuses what it cannot prove, and leaves the receipt behind. Restarting a pod is not the same as knowing which bucket must stay public.

Wiz automates hygiene on its own findings. Tamnoon works on what remains after that. It investigates each Issue read-only in your live environment, groups things together to increase efficiency of each action instead of going a single Issue at a time, closes what it can prove safe through your own change process, declines what it cannot with the evidence why, and answers for the outcome.

No. Tamnoon sits downstream of the Wiz you already run, reading Issues through the integration with read scope. No scanner to replace, no contract to end, no second agent in production.

Tamnoon reads them. When Wiz draws a path, Tamnoon walks it hop by hop, read-only, and rates the fix at each hop. A change that breaks the attack path is only safe if it breaks nothing else, and that second condition is exactly what the investigation exists to prove.

A tool that fires fixes blind is an autoimmune reaction: it attacks the body it is supposed to protect. Tamnoon starts from the opposite premise. Every fix is investigated read-only first, against live traffic, usage, dependencies and ownership. What it cannot prove safe it refuses, and the refusal ships with the evidence why. You were not wrong to pull the plug on a tool that could not tell you why a change was safe.