We performed a comparison between Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Trend Micro Deep Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."The solution helped free other staff to work on other projects or other tasks. We basically just had to do a bunch of upfront configuring. With it, we do not have to spend as much time in the console."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"I did a lot of research before signing up and doing the demo. They have a good reputation as far as catching threats early on."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"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."
"It is advantageous in terms of time-saving and cost reduction."
"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."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"The technical support is good."
"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."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"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."
"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 of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"Aside from the basic antivirus features, there are additional features such as vulnerability protection, firewall, etc. which are helpful."
"The file integrity and log inspection are game-changing features for us."
"Technical support is good."
"We've found stability to be great so far."
"It is connected into an intelligence database and is quick to pick up new threats. It also reduces my workload with its speed and the protection that it provides."
"Deep Security provides us with a lot of reassurance about security threats. You don't have to worry about a patch not being there in the software. You're confident that all the patches and vulnerabilities are taken care of."
"There is no competition for this product, as no other product provides HIPS, host-firewall, and anti-malware together."
"There's room for improvement in the graphic explorer."
"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"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."
"They could generally give us better comprehensive rules."
"Their search feature could be better."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"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."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"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 testing process could be improved."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"The tool needs to improve its subscription."
"The implementation can be inflexible and not easy, as it requires knowledge of things like virtualization and administration on Windows."
"I would rate tech support in the range of six to eight out of 10. Time to provide solution could be improved."
"Another issue is if I want to suggest this solution to a customer, we won't get the pricing immediately, which is a major problem."
"There should be signature-based advanced and responsive features."
"There is room for improvement with Trend Micro Deep Security, as there are instances where installations may need to be redone. There seem to be glitches when working with older Windows servers, such as those from 2003 or 2005, requiring us to uninstall and reinstall the product to resolve the issue."
"The price could be reduced."
"They are still working on the company integration from TippingPoint because this was a recent acquisition from a few years ago. So, a Tipping Point integration with Deep Security, having one single pane of glass dashboard, would provide us a simple use case."
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 Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. 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 Trend Micro Deep Security writes "High availability, effective VPM, and responsive support". 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 Qualys VMDR, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security.
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.
