We performed a comparison between Aqua Cloud Security Platform and CoreOS Clair based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"We really appreciate the Slack integration. When we have an incident, we get an instant notification. We also use Joe Sandbox, which Singularity can integrate with, so we can verify if a threat is legitimate."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to gain deep visibility into the workloads inside containers."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"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 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."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar to a sandbox environment."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"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."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"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."
"They could generally give us better comprehensive rules."
"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."
"PingSafe's current documentation could be improved to better assist customers during the cluster onboarding process."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"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."
"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."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"The solution could improve user-friendliness."
"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."
"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 7th in Container Security with 16 reviews while CoreOS Clair is ranked 26th in Container Security with 1 review. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while CoreOS Clair is rated 8.0. 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 CoreOS Clair writes "Excellent detection accuracy". 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 CoreOS Clair is most compared with JFrog Xray, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Snyk, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Qualys VMDR.
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.