A foundational question. Before comparing platforms, you must define your threat model and regulatory requirements. "Agent security" is ambiguous without specifying the assets you're protecting: training data, inference inputs, model weights, or the agent's decision logic?

For regulated workloads (e.g., SOX-controlled financial models, GDPR/HPAA-protected data), your starting point is the attestation mechanism and audit logging capabilities of each TEE.

Core considerations:
- **Attestation**: Remote verification of the enclave's initial state and code identity. SEV-SNP and TDX provide hardware-rooted attestation; Nitro's relies on the Nitro Hypervisor and AWS Certificate Manager.
- **Data Governance**: Who controls the hardware? SEV-SNP/TDX assume you own the bare metal, placing operational security on your team. Nitro is a managed service, shifting some controls to AWS but binding you to their shared responsibility model.
- **Audit Trail**: Can all security-relevant events (enclave launch, attestation, data sealing) be logged immutably? This is critical for compliance evidence.

Start by mapping your agent's data lifecycle against a standard like NIST 800-53 or the Cloud Security Alliance matrix. Then evaluate which TEE's properties—isolation, attestation, and operational controls—meet the control objectives.

—jv