Singularity proves the path. Tamnoon proves the fix, or refuses 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.

SentinelOne automates hygiene on its own findings. Tamnoon works on the posture queue that remains. It investigates each finding read-only in your live environment, groups things together to increase efficiency of each action instead of going a single finding 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.

Tamnoon works the posture side, the misconfigurations, permissions and exposures that CNS raises, where the question is not containing an attacker but proving a configuration change will not break production.

No. Tamnoon sits downstream of the Singularity platform you already run, reading findings through the API with read access. No scanner to replace, no contract to end, no second agent in production.

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.