Security Comparisons

    Windsurf vs Cursor: Security Comparison

    Both Windsurf and Cursor are AI-powered IDEs that generate code for you. But which one is more secure? We compared data privacy, code generation security, extension risks, and enterprise features side by side.

    The bottom line

    Neither Windsurf nor Cursor is inherently more secure. Both send your code to external servers, both generate code with similar vulnerability patterns, and both require you to review generated code for security issues. The real risk is in the code they produce, not the IDE itself.

    Data Privacy

    FeatureCursorWindsurfVerdict
    Code sent to cloudYes, to OpenAI/Anthropic/customYes, to Codeium serversBoth send code externally
    Local/offline modeNo native offline modeNo native offline modeTie -- both require internet
    SOC 2 complianceSOC 2 Type II certifiedSOC 2 Type II certifiedTie -- both certified
    Data retention policyNo training on user code (paid)No training on user code (paid)Tie -- similar policies

    Code Generation Security

    FeatureCursorWindsurfVerdict
    Generates auth correctlyOften skips server-side validationSimilar gaps in auth patternsBoth need review
    Secret handlingSometimes puts secrets in codeSometimes puts secrets in codeBoth risky -- always review
    Dependency suggestionsMay suggest outdated packagesMay suggest non-existent packagesWindsurf slightly riskier
    SQL injection preventionUsually parameterizes queriesUsually parameterizes queriesTie -- both generally ok

    Extension & Plugin Security

    FeatureCursorWindsurfVerdict
    MCP server supportYes -- can run arbitrary toolsYes -- Cascade workflowsBoth introduce MCP risks
    Extension sandboxingVS Code extension modelVS Code fork extension modelTie -- same base model
    Custom rules files.cursorrules -- can enforce patterns.windsurfrules -- similar supportBoth support security rules
    Terminal accessFull terminal access for agentFull terminal access for CascadeBoth -- review commands

    Enterprise Security

    FeatureCursorWindsurfVerdict
    SSO supportAvailable on Business planAvailable on Enterprise planBoth support SSO
    Audit logsBusiness plan onlyEnterprise plan onlyTie -- enterprise only
    Self-hosted optionNoNoNeither offers self-hosting
    IP allowlistingNot availableNot availableTie -- neither supports it

    Security risks unique to each

    Cursor-specific risks

    • Multi-model routing: Code may be sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google depending on settings. More vendors = more attack surface.
    • Composer agent: Can create/modify files and run terminal commands autonomously. A compromised prompt could execute arbitrary code.
    • .cursorrules injection: Malicious repos can include .cursorrules files that alter code generation behavior when cloned.

    Windsurf-specific risks

    • Cascade persistence: Cascade maintains context across sessions. A prompt injection in one session could affect future sessions.
    • Codeium telemetry: Windsurf collects usage data for model improvement. Review their data processing agreement for your compliance needs.
    • Supercomplete feature: Proactively suggests code changes that may introduce security issues if accepted without review.

    How to secure code from either IDE

    1.

    Run automated security scans on every commit, regardless of which IDE generated the code

    2.

    Use .cursorrules or .windsurfrules to enforce security patterns (e.g., "always use parameterized queries")

    3.

    Review all generated authentication and authorization code manually before deployment

    4.

    Check that suggested npm packages actually exist and are maintained

    5.

    Enable Supabase RLS or Firebase security rules -- both IDEs skip this by default

    Related Comparisons

    Secure code from any AI IDE

    VibeEval scans the output of Cursor, Windsurf, and every other AI coding tool. It does not matter which IDE you use -- what matters is catching vulnerabilities before deployment.

    Start free security scan