We performed a comparison between Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is highly regarded for its extensive visibility and management features, including Cloud Security Posture Management and container security. On the other hand, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives acclaim for its excellent resource-sharing and segmentation capabilities. Prisma Cloud could be more customizable and integrate with ticketing solutions better. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes requires enhancements in testing, documentation, usability, and stability.
Service and Support: Some Prisma Cloud customers have called Palo Alto support exceptional and prompt, while others have reported sluggish response times. Customers have generally provided positive remarks about the customer service offered by Red Hat, deeming it to be of high quality.
Ease of Deployment: Some Prisma Cloud users found the setup process to be simple, but others said it was somewhat complicated. The deployment time varies depending on the customer environment. The setup for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes involves creating multiple customer resource files and deploying the desired image as a container. The setup is considered moderately easy and the deployment time varies based on the customer's needs, with financial institutions typically taking longer.
Pricing: Users have differing opinions on the setup cost of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, but many find it to be reasonable and competitive. On the other hand, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and offers subscription-based options along with a bundled price.
ROI: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has proven to be highly effective at preventing breaches, enhancing risk visibility, streamlining operations, and mitigating cyberattack threats. Users have provided limited feedback regarding the ROI of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
Comparison Results: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is preferred over Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Prisma Cloud offers comprehensive visibility and management options through a user-friendly web GUI. Users appreciate its anomaly detection abilities, seamless integration with other tools, and the ability to provide security across multi- and hybrid-cloud environments. Compared to Prisma Cloud, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes falls short in terms of usability, documentation, and stability.
"The most valuable features of Prisma Cloud are its cloud security posture management and cloud workload protection capabilities."
"Prisma Cloud has enabled us to take a very strong preventive approach to cloud security. One of the hardest things with cloud is getting visibility into workloads. With Prisma Cloud, you can go in and get that visibility, then set up policies to alert on risky behavior, e.g., if there are security groups or firewall ports open up. So, it is very helpful in preventing configuration errors in the cloud by having visibility. If there are issues, then you can find them and fix them."
"Prisma Cloud's inventory reporting is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature is the closed VPN connection, which provides better performance than traditional VPN boxes. For example, let's say a user in New York State normally connects in the East, but if they travel to the UK, they can connect to the same portal, which automatically redirects to any VPN gateway. We can control traffic based on Active Directory groups instead of the user's IP. That means a user in New York can access his application based on his user ID and AD group access when he travels to the UK or anywhere else."
"Palo Alto enables us to know what security threats are happening in the background."
"Prisma Cloud helped us with compliance. Most of my deployments have been greenfield, so I don't have a benchmark to compare how the security posture has improved. I've always used this from day zero of the configuration. However, I can say that the compliance checks for PCI, DSS, HIPAA, etc., made my life simpler. I don't need to look at each of these standards and compare the rules I have in place."
"It provides insights into potential vulnerabilities in our code, helping us identify and rectify issues before they can be exploited."
"I would say Twistlock is a fairly sophisticated tool."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"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."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"Prisma is good about compliance, and their support is excellent, but they struggle with automation and integration. They need to stay on top of the newest types of connectors. How can you connect other applications and other tools in order for this to work cohesively? That's a challenge."
"The feedback that we have given to the Palo Alto team is that the UI can be improved. When you press the "back" button on your browser from the Investigate tab, the query that you're working on just disappears. It won't keep the query on the "back" button."
"It's not really on par with, or catering to, what other products are looking at in terms of SAST and DAST capabilities. For those, you'd probably go to the market and look at something like Veracode or WhiteHat."
"The UI is good, however, they could improve the experience."
"Sometimes, when you assign subnets to regions, the IP address will jump from one location to another because it will automatically change substantially. Then, we need to add those IP subnets to our firewall for existing access. The need to update those subnets potentially causes maintenance or access issues. So far, we can only provide bigger customers with six subnets, and a small company may not be able to access those services."
"The security automation capabilities are average."
"For some custom policies, we need more features."
"Based on my experience, the customization—especially the interface and some of the product identification components—is not as customizable as it could be. But it makes up for that with the fact that we can access the API and then build our own systems to read the data and then process and parse it and hand it to our teams."
"The testing process could be improved."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"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 documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The solution's price could be better."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Container Security with 82 reviews while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub and Orca Security, whereas Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Sysdig Secure and Qualys VMDR. See our Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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.