We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The serverless capability and auto scale feature are the most valuable."
"It is appealing to us due to its complexity, which aligns well with our requirements."
"The platform's high scalability is one of its biggest advantages."
"The tool is budget-friendly."
"Its support team resolves technical issues accurately."
"Has a good management feature monitored by the cloud service provider."
"It is a stable solution."
"We find the container orchestration tool that this solution provides to be very valuable."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"The mean time to detect has been reduced."
"PingSafe provides email alerts and ranks issues based on severity, such as high, critical, etc., that help us prioritize issues."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"Our previous product took a lot of man hours to manage. Once we got Singularity Cloud Workload Security, it freed up our time to work on other tasks."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"The visibility PingSafe provides into the Cloud environment is a valuable feature."
"In terms of cost perspective, they could make the product more affordable."
"Unfortunately, when a microservice fails, Azure can take up to 60 seconds to broadcast an alert to the monitoring agents."
"The initial setup is complex."
"I would like to see Azure implement something like the K9 terminal for interacting with Kubernetes clusters. It's a user-friendly CLI interface."
"The initial setup of AKS is complicated. The setup depends on the cluster, nodes, and lots of other things. There are also lots of extremely critical small devices. Moreover, you will have to pay them even while setting up the solution. It is not like you setup first and then pay for it."
"There is room for improvement in automation processes, as well."
"The application firewall is lacking some features and there is room for enhancement."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"We use PingSafe and also SentinelOne. If PingSafe integrated some of the endpoint security features of SentinelOne, it would be the perfect one-stop solution for everything. We wouldn't need to switch between the products. At my organization, I am responsible for endpoint security and vulnerability management. Integrating both functions into one application would be ideal because I could see all the alerts, heat maps, and reports in one console."
"PingSafe takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"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."
"When we request any changes, they must be reflected in the next update."
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is ranked 6th in Container Security with 77 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security writes "Provides excellent workload telemetry, hunting capabilities, and deep visibility ". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with Red Hat OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher and Qualys VMDR, whereas SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Orca Security and AWS GuardDuty. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.
