We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and AWS GuardDuty based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"The UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"Since our environment is cloud based and accessible from the internet, we like the ability to check where the user has logged in from and what kind of API calls that user is doing."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The product has automated protection powered by AI/ML, which is now far more powerful than before. It uses AI/ML in its detection algorithm, providing fast and quick results."
"Deployment is great, and we didn't face any big challenges."
"The correlation back end is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action."
"What we found most valuable in Amazon GuardDuty is its threat detection feature, especially because we were monitoring a huge number of AWS accounts, so we needed a solution that would monitor for any kind of malicious activity. The monitoring aspect of the solution was great because it gave us timely notifications if and when anything happened, and Amazon GuardDuty helped keep us on our toes to make sure we took action right away."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"When we request any changes, they must be reflected in the next update."
"When you find a vulnerability and resolve it, the same issue will not occur again. I want PingSafe to block the same vulnerability from appearing again. I want something like a playbook where the steps that we take to resolve an issue are repeated when that issue happens again."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"PingSafe can improve by eliminating 100 percent of the false positives."
"The recommended actions aren't always specific, so it might suggest recommendations that don't apply to the particular infrastructure code I'm reviewing."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"There's an array of upcoming versions with numerous features to be incorporated into the roadmap. Customers particularly appreciate the service's emphasis on intensive security, especially the secret scanning aspect. During the proof of concept (POC) phase, the system is required to gather logs from the customer's environment. This process entails obtaining specific permissions, especially in terms of gateway access. While most permissions for POC are manageable, the need for various permissions may need improvement, especially in the context of security."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"Because it's a threat detection service, they need to keep up with the various threat factors because new threat factors and attack factors come up all the time."
"I work in a bank, and it would be good if AWS GuardDuty could be integrated with other monitoring and detection tools we use."
"There is currently no consolidated dashboard for AWS GuardDuty. It would be helpful if they could provide a dashboard based on severity levels (high, medium, low) and offer insights account-wise, especially for users utilizing automation structures."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"For me, I would say just the presentation of findings, like the dashboards and other stuff, could be improved a bit."
"We currently find Lacework to be much better at detecting vulnerabilities than AWS GuardDuty. The engines of AWS GuardDuty have to be improved."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 13th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 17 reviews while AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Xshield, whereas AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Qualys TotalCloud. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
