We performed a comparison of Qualys VMDR and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Qualys VMDR is praised for its user-friendly interface, prioritization system, and customizable dashboard. It effectively addresses vulnerabilities and offers valuable scanning capabilities. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives praise for its resource-sharing capabilities, segmentation, reliable performance, and user-friendly web interface. Reviewers said Qualys VMDR could improve by offering more customization options and integrating more seamlessly with other systems. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes could improve by enhancing testing capabilities, making command line and configuration processes easier, and incorporating zero trust and access control measures.
Service and Support: Qualys VMDR's customer service is mostly considered accessible and responsive. However, some reviewers reported slow response times and expressed a desire for more skilled support personnel. Customers using Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes gave feedback and regard the support they receive as being of high quality.
Ease of Deployment: The Qualys VMDR setup is considered uncomplicated and efficient, requiring only a short amount of time. A few users encountered challenges with integration and ensuring data privacy. The setup process for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes involves multiple steps, and total deployment can take days or weeks.
Pricing: The cost of Qualys VMDR varies depending on the organization's business requirements. Some find it affordable, but others consider it costly compared to alternatives. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions.
ROI: Qualys VMDR offers users a solid ROI by efficiently identifying vulnerabilities and effectively reducing risks. Our users have given no feedback on the ROI of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes so far.
Comparison Results: Qualys VMDR is preferred over Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Qualys is highly regarded for its intuitive interface and extensive vulnerability tracking. Users appreciate its continuous monitoring and asset-tagging capabilities. Some users say Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes lacks certain features compared to its competitors. There is room for improvement in deployment, testing, documentation, and stability.
"The tool identifies issues quickly."
"The remediation process is good."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"Cloud Native Security is user-friendly. Everything in the Cloud Native Security tool is straightforward, including detections, integration, reporting, etc. They are constantly improving their UI by adding plugins and other features."
"PingSafe's most valuable feature is its unified console."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"The most valuable feature of PingSafe is its integration with most of our technology stack, specifically all of our cloud platforms and ticketing software."
"What I like about Qualys VM is the dashboard presentation. It's very good."
"The solution shows us classic categories, including high, medium, and low risks. It also shows critical items, and that gives us the advantage of prioritizing things."
"I am impressed with the VMDR feature."
"It's a good product. After the scan our internet works well. It scans our security posture."
"Qualys VM has allowed us to know the vulnerabilities we need to prioritize based on the threat levels and the possible impact if there's an intrusion."
"Intuitive and easy to use."
"Vulnerability management is the most valuable one and it’s a must in every organization."
"It is a stable solution."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"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."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"In addition to the console alerts, I would like PingSafe to also send email notifications."
"Whenever I view the processes and the process aspect, it takes a long time to load."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"Cloud Native Security's reporting could be better. We are unable to see which images are impacted. Several thousand images have been deployed, so if we can see some application-specific information in the dashboard, we can directly send that report to the team that owns the application. We'd also like the option to download the report from the portal instead of waiting for the report to be sent to our email."
"There is no break-glass account feature. They should implement this as soon as possible because we can't implement SSO without a break-glass feature."
"I would like additional integrations."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"They have integrated with other third parties, but it is still not viable."
"We are moving away from Qualys to Defender ATP because I find that Defender ATP is much better at prioritizing the vulnerabilities that I should be looking at."
"Qualys should improve their customer experience. They need to improve the tech support experience and the turnaround time."
"Integration could be better. When you think about scanning, it's not used just with this product alone but with other Qualys products. If you think about the bundle, the product itself is good. But integration with other products and packages has space for improvement. They should also offer a better price for bundles."
"Endpoint stability and fault resolution could be improved."
"Qualys VM's scanner doesn't pick up every vulnerability, so we have to use multiple scanners to cover that gap."
"Its integration with ServiceNow and other similar products is complicated and can be improved. It should also have virtual batching. They should support more standards and compliance requirements and more customizations. For policy compliance, they can add the standards required by the countries in the Middle East. Each country generates its own standards and frameworks, and those frameworks should be there in all products, not only in Qualys. The market here is huge, especially in the cybersecurity field. Qatar has a framework for Qatar 2022, and each and every company in the public or private sector has to follow the Qatar 2022 framework."
"The reporting and the GUI need improvements."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"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 price could be better."
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 →
Qualys VMDR is ranked 11th in Container Security with 77 reviews while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 18th in Container Security with 10 reviews. Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". 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 ". Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management, 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 Sysdig Secure. See our Qualys VMDR 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.
