We performed a comparison between AWS GuardDuty and Trellix Cloud Workload Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"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 offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"It helps us detect brute-force attacks based on machine learning."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"Deployment is great, and we didn't face any big challenges."
"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."
"The solution is easy to use."
"One of the advantages of cloud services is the ability to use them on demand. There's minimal installation involved; you can check the latest offerings and make new deployments while dismantling the previous ones. This approach keeps you ahead of potential services, showcasing the agility of AWS."
"What we found most valuable in Amazon GuardDuty is its threat detection feature, especially because we were monitoring a huge number of AWS accounts, so we needed a solution that would monitor for any kind of malicious activity. The monitoring aspect of the solution was great because it gave us timely notifications if and when anything happened, and Amazon GuardDuty helped keep us on our toes to make sure we took action right away."
"We have over 1,000 employees, and we monitor their activity through AWS GuardDuty."
"The most valuable feature is the application control."
"The discovery feature is the most valuable. After you integrate your cloud environment, maybe an Azure or AWS, or a private environment hosted on VMware, it automatically starts discovering the number of servers that are running on that cloud and the number of services that you have done. It is a beautiful feature because, from a security standpoint, it is difficult to identify which VM is compliant or not when you keep on provisioning a number of VMs in the cloud. It also checks for compliance. It checks whether a system is compliant and whether antivirus is installed on a VM. If an antivirus is installed, it checks whether the antivirus is updated to the latest signature package or not. All these things are beautifully done by McAfee Cloud Workload Security. For communicating with the McAfee server, you need to install an agent on the VM. McAfee Cloud Workload Security gives you a direct opportunity to install an agent on a Windows machine. If you have a Windows cloud, you can directly push that agent onto the VM through your McAfee portal. It provides you a single dashboard view of all servers present in the cloud. It shows the servers on which the antivirus is already installed as well as the servers for which the antivirus installation is still pending. This dashboard view is a much-needed thing. It also has a centralized management, which makes it easy to use."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"Their search feature could be better."
"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."
"When we get a new finding from PingSafe, I wish we could get an alert in the console, so we can work on it before we see it in the report. It would be very useful for the team that is actively working on the PingSafe platform, so we can close the issue the same day before it appears in the daily report."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"Customized queries should be made easier to improve PingSafe."
"AWS GuardDuty sometimes shows false positives and should have better detection accuracy."
"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 product needs to improve its cost-efficiency since it is expensive."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"Amazon GuardDuty could be better enriched in threat intelligence data."
"It would be great if the solution had some automation capabilities."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
"Some of the pain points in Amazon GuardDuty was the cost. When compared to some of the other services, depending on how many we had to monitor, if we had a huge range of accounts, as our accounts increased, we had a cost factor that came into play. Sometimes there were issues, for example, with findings that came up, we wanted to add notes and there were issues back then where notes couldn't be entered properly. If we wanted to leave a note such as "Okay, we have assessed this and this is how we feel", or "This is a false positive", Amazon GuardDuty wasn't allowing us to do that. Even with the suppression of certain findings, there was some issue that we had faced at one time. Those were some of the pain points of the solution."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"Its vulnerability assessment is not the best. We cannot identify the vulnerabilities that are related to the operating system by using McAfee Cloud Workload Security. I wish McAfee would add a vulnerability assessment tool that will not only identify the vulnerability but will also be able to generate a report so that the required patching can be done for the servers. Currently, McAfee Cloud Workload Security only integrates with AWS and Azure. If it can also integrate with GCP, Alibaba, and other cloud services available in the market, it would be good because not all people are using Azure and AWS."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Trellix Cloud Workload Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews while Trellix Cloud Workload Security is ranked 19th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 2 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2, while Trellix Cloud Workload Security is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Cloud Workload Security writes "Easy policy designing and highly scalable solution". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Wiz, whereas Trellix Cloud Workload Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Trend Vision One - Cloud Security. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Trellix Cloud Workload Security 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.
