We’re building a “control layer” for the Digital Devices — because users don’t fail once, they fail in small repeated moments
Most security products are built around big scary events.
Malware. Phishing. Breaches. Compromised accounts.
But when we started thinking deeply about everyday computer use, the problem looked smaller and more boring — which made it more interesting.
A lot of risk does not start with “an attack.”
It starts with normal behavior:
Opening a link quickly.
Downloading a file from search results.
Installing an extension without checking permissions.
Approving a browser prompt because you are busy.
Switching between tools and losing context.
Letting speed beat judgment.
The more we looked at it, the more we felt the problem was not only “security.”
It was lack of control at the action level.
Users do not need another dashboard that tells them something went wrong after the fact.
They need the computer to help them understand what is happening before they act.
That is the direction we are exploring with Avao Control:
A control layer for everyday computer actions — where privacy, safer browsing, performance, and context sit closer to the user’s actual workflow.
Not another antivirus.
Not another productivity widget.
Not a bloated “AI assistant” trying to do everything.
More like a center of control for the actions people already take every day.
The hard part is deciding where to start.
Security-aware users care about safer browsing and privacy.
Power users care about speed, performance, tooling, and control.
But both groups seem to meet in the same place:
They want their machine to feel less random.
Curious how other founders think about this:
When you build for early users, do you start with the strongest pain point, or the broader long-term vision?
The distinction between security and control is the interesting part. I'd keep validating whether users are actually buying protection from threats or confidence in the decisions they make before those threats ever become incidents. That changes both the product and the positioning.
Yeah, exactly. That’s the part we’re still learning too, whether people are buying “security” itself, or the confidence to know they’re making the right move before something goes wrong.
I'm glad it resonated.
Reading your reply gave me one thought about how I'd distinguish between those two buying motivations in practice. I don't think I could explain the reasoning properly in a thread because it really depends on what you're building rather than security in general.
If you're interested, what's the best email to reach you on?