We performed a comparison between Tenable.io Container Security and Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"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."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
"Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"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."
"It is scalable. It deploys easily with curl and yum."
"An important feature of this solution is monitoring. Specifically, container monitoring."
"It has been quite helpful to have the daily alerts coming to my email, as well as the Sev 1 Alerts... We just went through a SOX audit and those were pivotal."
"There has been a measurable decrease in the meantime to remediation... because we have so many different tech verticals already collated in one place, our ability to respond is drastically different than it used to be."
"We like the ability of the host security module to monitor the processes running on our servers to help us monitor activity."
"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 most valuable feature is the SecOps because they have our back and they help us with the reports... It's like having an extension of your team. And then, it grows with you."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"Bugs need to be disclosed quickly."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"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 stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"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."
"It shoots back a lot of alerts."
"Some features do not work as expected."
"The compliance and governance need improvement."
"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 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."
"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."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 21st in Container Security with 7 reviews while Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is ranked 31st in Container Security. Tenable.io Container Security is rated 7.8, while Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". 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". Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Trivy and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, 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 Tenable.io Container Security vs. Threat Stack Cloud Security Platform 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.