We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cymulate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"The reporting capabilities are very good."
"The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware."
"The reporting process requires significant improvement as it often takes longer than expected and the quality is lacking."
"The product must provide consultancy for initial setup."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 4th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 17 reviews while Cymulate is ranked 2nd in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 2 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Cymulate is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cymulate writes "An affordable solution that improves an organization’s security posture and provides excellent reporting capabilities". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Cymulate is most compared with Pentera, Picus Security, XM Cyber, SafeBreach and AttackIQ. See our Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Cymulate report.
See our list of best Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) vendors.
We monitor all Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) 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.