We performed a comparison between Aqua Security Platform AWS GuardDuty and based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Aqua Security Platform received positive comments about its container security and malware detection. Users praised AWS GuardDuty for its unified data collection and ability to analyze logs from multiple sources. Aqua Security Platform has room for improvement in automated report delivery and log forwarding. Users would say Aqua is resource heavy, and the user interface could be overhauled. AWS GuardDuty users asked for a mobile version to accommodate remote workers and more analytics in the dashboard.
Service and Support: Customers have generally had positive experiences with Aqua Security Platform customer service, finding them responsive and helpful. However, some customers complained that they were forced to resolve issues themselves. AWS GuardDuty customers have praised the excellent support provided by the Amazon team, citing quick response times. Some noted dissatisfaction with wait times for phone support.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Aqua Security Platform can be either simple or challenging, depending on the environment and user expertise. Some users could easily complete the setup with the help of documentation, but others encountered challenges. AWS GuardDuty's setup was generally considered to be effortless and uncomplicated.
Pricing: Aqua Security Platform is considered to be moderately priced relative to other solutions. AWS GuardDuty has a competitive pay-go pricing model. The cost of AWS GuardDuty is determined by the amount of data processed.
ROI: Aqua Security Platform delivers value by relying on information from trusted sources or direct communication with Aqua Security. AWS GuardDuty boosts security and overall customer trust, potentially opening doors for new business prospects.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer AWS GuardDuty over the Aqua Security Platform. Users like AWS GuardDuty's straightforward setup, whereas some consider Aqua Security Platform to be tricky to deploy. AWS GuardDuty stands out for its ability to provide a single system for data collection and alert mechanisms. Users find its pay-go price model to be flexible and competitive.
"PingSafe released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. PingSafe's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."
"The agentless vulnerability scanning is great."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"The UI is very good."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"There's real-time threat detection. It can show threats and find issues based on their severity and helps us with real-time monitoring."
"It is advantageous in terms of time-saving and cost reduction."
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"The container security element of this product has been very valuable to our organization."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"It helps us detect brute-force attacks based on machine learning."
"The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action."
"It kinda just gives us another layer of security. So it does provide some sort of comfort that we do have something that is monitoring for abnormal behavior."
"What I like most about Amazon GuardDuty is that you can monitor your AWS accounts across, but you don't have to pay the additional cost. You can get all your CloudTrail VPC flow logs and DNS logs all in one, and then you get the monitoring with that. A lot of times, if you had a separate tool on-premise, you would have to set up your DNS logs, so usually, Amazon GuardDuty helps with all your additional networking requirements, so I utilize it for continuous monitoring because you can't detect anything if you're not monitoring, and the solution fills that gap. If you don't do anything else first, you can deploy your firewall, and then you've got your Route 53 DNS and DNSSEC, but then Amazon GuardDuty fills that, and then you have audit requirements in AU that says, "Hey, what are your additional logs?", so you can just say, "Hey, we utilize Amazon GuardDuty." You're getting your CloudTrail, your VPC flow logs, and all your DNS logs, and those are your additional logs right there, so the solution meets a lot of requirements. Now, everything comes with a cost, but I also like that the solution also provides threat response and remediation. It's a pretty good product. I've just used it more for log analysis and that's where the value is at, the niche value. Once you do threat detection, it goes into a lot of other integrations you need to implement, so threat detection is only good as the integration, as the user that knows the tools itself, and the architecture and how it's all set up and the rules that you set within that."
"AWS GuardDuty helps by providing continuous threat detection and signaling potential threats. Its most valuable feature is continuous monitoring. The tool's integration with other AWS services has improved security. It provides continuous monitoring and intelligent threat detection, quickly signaling any issues. I would rate this improvement a seven out of ten."
"It is a highly scalable solution since it is a service by AWS. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"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."
"They could generally give us better comprehensive rules."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"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."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"I used to work on AWS. At times, I would generate a normal bug in my system, and then I would check PingSafe. The alert used to come after about three and a half hours. It used to take that long to generate the alert about the vulnerability in my system. If a hacker attacks a system and PingSafe takes three to four hours to generate an alert, it will not be beneficial for the company. It would be helpful if we get the alert in five to ten minutes."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the graphic explorer."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"I would like Aqua Security to look into is the development of a web security portal."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"There's room for improvement, particularly in management capabilities as it may not be comprehensive enough for all customers, and it has been lacking in the realm of cloud security posture management."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"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."
"I work in a bank, and it would be good if AWS GuardDuty could be integrated with other monitoring and detection tools we use."
"One improvement I would suggest for AWS GuardDuty is the ability to assign findings to specific users or groups, facilitating better communication and follow-up actions."
"Cost changes. It's very expensive. If you turn on every feature, it's more than most commercial vendors. For smaller orgs, that doesn't make sense."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"It would be great if the solution had some automation capabilities."
"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."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 11th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 16 reviews while AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "Reliable with good container scanning and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Snyk, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and SUSE NeuVector, whereas AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Illumio. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Aqua Cloud Security Platform 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.
