We performed a comparison between Sysdig Secure and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Sysdig Secure stands out for its seamless integration with cloud services, strong DevSecOps capabilities, reliable runtime security, and efficient log monitoring. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives praise for its resource-sharing capabilities, segmentation, reliable performance, and user-friendly web interface. Sysdig Secure users say the solution should improve Cloud Security Posture Management while making the dashboard simpler and more customizable. 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: Sysdig Secure users describe the support team as excellent and well-informed. 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: Users say Sysdig Secure's setup isn’t complex if customers have skilled personnel or a dedicated team. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes requires considerable time and effort to deploy due to its complex configuration process.
Pricing: Sysdig Secure licensing is considered flexible and reasonable. The cost varies depending on factors like the number of agents used and the user's environment. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions.
Comparison Results: Users prefer Sysdig Secure over Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Users appreciate Sysdig Secure for its simple initial setup, comprehensive capabilities, integration with cloud security, and efficient user management. It also stands out in terms of DevSecOps and offers valuable features like runtime security and log monitoring. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes has a more complicated setup process that involves multiple steps. It requires additional improvements in testing, pricing, and documentation.
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"PingSafe's most valuable feature is its unified console."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"The offensive security where they do a fix is valuable. They go to a misconfiguration and provide detailed alerts on what could be there. They also provide a remediation feature where if we give the permission, they can also go and fix the issue."
"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."
"There's real-time threat detection. It can show threats and find issues based on their severity and helps us with real-time monitoring."
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"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."
"The technical support is good."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."
"The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying to do, he proactively takes that as an investigation topic and looks into it. He'll provide the solution even though we might not have asked him to investigate it."
"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."
"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."
"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."
"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."
"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."
"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."
"Their search feature could be better."
"The Kubernetes scanning on the Oracle Cloud needs to be improved. It's on the roadmap. AWS has this capability, but it's unavailable for Oracle Cloud."
"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."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"PingSafe takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"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."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The testing process could be improved."
"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."
"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."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"Reporting can definitely be better. Live dashboards should be configurable for a longer period of time rather than 30 days. Being able to go back in time to compare six months ago to today would be valuable."
"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."
"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."
"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."
"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."
"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."
"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."
"The dashboard could be more simple and show the more important issues that are detected first. We'd like to be able to set it up so more important issues show up more prominently in the dashboard."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 18th in Container Security with 10 reviews while Sysdig Secure is ranked 17th in Container Security with 9 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while Sysdig Secure is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sysdig Secure writes "A security scanning tool with great insight on your workloads running anywhere". 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 Snyk, whereas Sysdig Secure is most compared with Wiz, Sysdig Falco, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector and Qualys VMDR. See our Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. Sysdig Secure 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.
