We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform 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."PingSafe can integrate all your cloud accounts and resources you create in the AWS account, We have set it up to scan the AWS transfer services, EC2, security groups, and GitHub."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"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."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"When creating cloud infrastructure, Cloud Native Security evaluates the cloud security parameters and how they will impact the organization's risk. It lets us know whether our security parameter conforms to international industry standards. It alerts us about anything that increases our risk, so we can address those vulnerabilities and prevent attacks."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"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."
"The solution's robust security posture is the most valuable feature."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"One important security feature is the incident alerts. Now, with all these cyberattacks, there are a lot of incident alerts that get triggered. It is very difficult to keep monitoring everything automatically, instead our organization is utilizing the automated use case that we get from Microsoft. That has helped bring down the manual work for a lot of things."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the vulnerability assessments and the glossary of compliance."
"The most valuable features are ransomware protection and access controls. The solution has helped us secure some folders on our systems from unauthorized modifications."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
"Most importantly, it's an integrated solution. We not only have Defender for Cloud, but we also have Defender for Endpoint, Defender for Office 365, and Defender for Identity. It's an integrated, holistic solution."
"With Threat Stack, we quickly identified some AWS accounts which had services that would potentially be exposed and were able to remediate them prior to release of products."
"We're using it on container to see when activity involving executables happens, and that's great."
"It is scalable. It deploys easily with curl and yum."
"We like the ability of the host security module to monitor the processes running on our servers to help us monitor activity."
"Every other security tool we've looked is good at containers, or at Kubernetes, is good at AWS, or at instance monitoring. But nobody is good at tying all of those things together, and that's really where Threat Stack shines."
"The rules are really great. They give us more visibility and control over what's being triggered. There's a large set of rules that come out-of-the-box. We can customize them and we can create our own rules based on the traffic patterns that we see."
"The number-one feature is the monitoring of interactive sessions on our Linux machines. We run an immutable environment, so that nothing is allowed to be changed in production... We're constantly monitoring to make sure that no one is violating that. Threat Stack is what allows us to do that."
"An important feature of this solution is monitoring. Specifically, container monitoring."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"For vulnerabilities, they are showing CVE ID. The naming convention should be better so that it indicates the container where a vulnerability is present. Currently, they are only showing CVE ID, but the same CVE ID might be present in multiple containers. We would like to have the container name so that we can easily fix the issue."
"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."
"They could generally give us better comprehensive rules."
"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."
"No possibility to write or edit any capability."
"The documentation and implementation guides could be improved."
"Agent features need to be improved. They support agents through Azure Arc or Workbench. Sometimes, we are not able to get correct signals from the machines on which we have installed these agents. We are not able to see how many are currently reporting to Azure Security Center, and how many are currently not reporting. For example, we have 1,000 machines, and we have enrolled 1,000 OMS agents on these machines to collect the log. When I look at the status, even though at some places, it shows that it is connected, but when I actually go and check, I'm not getting any alerts from those. There are some discrepancies on the agent, and the agent features are not up to the mark."
"Another thing is that Defender for Cloud uses more resources than CrowdStrike, which my current company uses. Defender for Cloud has two or three processes running simultaneously that consume memory and processor time. I had the chance to compare that with CrowdStrike a few days ago, which was significantly less. It would be nice if Defender were a little lighter. It's a relatively large installation that consumes more resources than competitors do."
"As an analyst, there is no way to configure or create a playbook to automate the process of flagging suspicious domains."
"Azure is a complex solution. You have so many moving parts."
"You cannot create custom use cases."
"The user interface can be a little bit clunky at times... There's a lot of information that needs to be waded through, and the UI just isn't great."
"I would like further support of Windows endpoint agents or the introduction of support for Windows endpoint agents."
"The compliance and governance need improvement."
"The API - which has grown quite a bit, so we're still learning it and I can't say whether it still needs improvement - was an area that had been needing it."
"It shoots back a lot of alerts."
"The one thing that we know they're working on, but we don't have through the tool, is the application layer. As we move to a serverless environment, with AWS Fargate or direct Lambda, that's where Threat Stack does not have the capacity to provide feed. Those are areas that it's blind to now..."
"The solution’s ability to consume alerts and data in third-party tools (via APIs and export into S3 buckets) is moderate. They have some work to do in that area... The API does not mimic the features of the UI as far as reporting and pulling data out go. There's a big discrepancy there."
"The reports aren't very good. We've automated the report generation via the API and replaced almost all the reports that they generate for us using API calls instead."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 46 reviews while Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is ranked 28th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP). Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.2. 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 Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform writes "SecOps program for us, as a smaller company, is amazing; they know what to look for". 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 Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Darktrace, AWS GuardDuty, Palo Alto Networks URL Filtering with PAN-DB, Qualys VMDR and Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, best Container Security vendors, and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) 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.
