We performed a comparison between Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and SUSE NeuVector based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives praise for its resource-sharing capabilities, segmentation, reliable performance, and user-friendly web interface. SUSE NeuVector is praised for its wide range of features, informative user interface, ISO certification checks, and automation capabilities. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes could improve by enhancing testing capabilities, making command line and configuration processes easier, and incorporating zero trust and access control measures. SUSE NeuVector needs to expand scanning support and work on monitoring, reporting, and integration.
Service and Support: Customers using Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes gave feedback and regard the support they receive as being of high quality. SUSE NeuVector's support is praised for being supportive, prompt, and well-informed, although a few reviewers consider the process to be complex.
Ease of Deployment: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions. Some reviewers think setting up SUSE NeuVector is straightforward, while others find it complex and challenging. Integrating SUSE NeuVector with pipelines is particularly difficult, often requiring the use of custom scripts.
Pricing: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions. The pricing and licensing experiences of SUSE NeuVector users vary, with some considering it affordable and others indicating a need for improvement.
ROI: Our users have given no feedback on the ROI of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes so far. SUSE NeuVector provides the largest ROI for high-risk sectors such as financial services, although its benefits may be limited for some sectors, such as retail.
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"The multi-cloud support is valuable. They are expanding to different clouds. It is not restricted to only AWS. It allows us to have different clouds on one platform."
"With PingSafe, it's easy to onboard new accounts."
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"We use the infrastructure as code scanning, which is good."
"The UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"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 ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"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."
"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."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"The technical support is good."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"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."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"I would like additional integrations."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"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 testing process could be improved."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"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."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
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 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 19th in Container Security with 7 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. 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 SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Qualys VMDR and Sysdig Secure, whereas SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Sysdig Falco, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Secure and Snyk. See our Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. SUSE NeuVector 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.