Prova vs Lakera
Lakera stops malicious prompts from getting through. Prova proves the reasoning that comes back out is sound.
Try Prova freeLakera Guard is a runtime safety firewall for LLM applications. It classifies prompts and outputs against policies for prompt injection, jailbreaks, PII leakage, and unsafe content. Prova sits in a different layer: it takes the AI's reasoning chain and formally verifies that the argument structure is logically valid. Neither replaces the other.
| Feature | Prova | Lakera |
|---|---|---|
| Prompt injection defense | No | Yes |
| Jailbreak classification | No | Yes |
| PII and toxicity filters | No | Yes |
| Formal reasoning verification | Yes | No |
| Circular reasoning detection | Yes | No |
| Contradiction detection | Yes | No |
| Unsupported leap detection | Yes | No |
| Signed certificates per output | Yes | No |
| Math foundation | H1(K;Z) = 0 | ML classifiers |
| Runtime latency budget | ~1-3s | <100ms |
Where Prova is different
Different problem, different guarantee
Lakera answers "is this input or output safe to allow?" Prova answers "is the reasoning chain structurally valid?" You want both running in production. Lakera gates the wire; Prova certifies the argument.
Certificates regulators accept
Lakera produces block/allow decisions and telemetry. Prova produces signed PRV-YYYY-XXXX certificates with specific failure citations. For EU AI Act Article 13 transparency obligations, only the latter is an evidentiary artifact.
Deterministic verdicts
Lakera Guard is a classifier and its labels will drift as models retrain. Prova certificates are anchored to fixed prova_version + validator_version pairs. Re-running the same reasoning chain against the same version always produces the same certificate.
Use Lakera for runtime prompt-injection defense and content-policy enforcement. Use Prova when you need proof that the reasoning behind a decision is logically valid. Most serious deployments need both.