We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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 UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"The UI is very good."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"The agentless vulnerability scanning is great."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its storyline, which helps trace an event back to its source, like an email or someone clicking on a link."
"Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."
"The most valuable features are ransomware protection and access controls. The solution has helped us secure some folders on our systems from unauthorized modifications."
"It isn't a highly complex solution. It's something that a lot of analysts can use. Defender gives you a broad overview of what's happening in your environment, and it's a great solution if you're a Microsoft shop."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"The security alerts and correlated alerts are most valuable. It correlates the logs and gives us correlated alerts, which can be fed into any security information and event management (SIEM) tool. It is an analyzed correlation tool for monitoring security. It gives us alerts when there is any kind of unauthorized access, or when there is any malfunctioning in multifactor authentication (MFA). If our Azure is connected with Azure Security Center, we get to know what types of authentication are happening in our infra."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"It works seamlessly on the Azure platform because it's a Microsoft app. Its setup is similar, so if you already have a Microsoft account, it just flows into it."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"The technical support is good."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"The recommended actions aren't always specific, so it might suggest recommendations that don't apply to the particular infrastructure code I'm reviewing."
"When we request any changes, they must be reflected in the next update."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"In some cases, the rules are strictly enforced but do not align with real-world use cases."
"The Automation tab is an add-on that doesn’t work properly. They provide a list of scripts that don’t work and I have asked support to assist but they won’t help. When running on various endpoints the script doesn’t work and if it does, it’s only a couple. There are a lot of useful scripts that would be beneficial to run forensics, event logs, and process lists running on the endpoint."
"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 are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"Another thing that could be improved was that they could recommend processes on how to react to alerts, or recommend best practices based on how other organizations do things if they receive an alert about XYZ."
"I would like to see better automation when it comes to pushing out security features to the recommendations, and better documentation on the step-by-step procedures for enabling certain features."
"The product was a bit complex to set up earlier, however, it is a bit streamlined now."
"One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."
"The initial setup is not actually so complex but it feels complex because there are many add-ons. There are many options and my team needs to be aware of all of these changes happening on the backend which is a distraction."
"Defender is occasionally unreliable. It isn't 100% efficient in terms of antivirus detection, but it isn't an issue most of the time. It's also somewhat difficult to train new security analysts to use Defender."
"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"After getting a recommendation, it takes time for the solution to refresh properly to show that the problem has been eliminated."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution's price could be better."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Container Security with 46 reviews while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 18th in Container Security with 10 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS). See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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.
