We performed a comparison between Azure Key Vault and Microsoft Defender for Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Microsoft Security Suite solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution does an excellent job of storing and retrieving our stored keys."
"It stores sensitive information in an encrypted way. We don't have to worry about data loss or data theft because no one can see our information."
"The security on offer seems to be quite good."
"The most valuable feature is that you can retrieve user account details from the cloud."
"We use Azure Key Vault to store secrets."
"Among the features that have helped improve our security posture are storing secrets in a secure location to create a trusted situation, trusted resources, and incorporating identity access management so that we know who has access to what."
"I am satisfied with the product overall."
"This solution speeds up the product development life cycle. That is, the time from the development of the product to the time to market is drastically reduced because of the CI/CD pipelines. You can have your code deployed within a matter of minutes."
"The solution's robust security posture is the most valuable feature."
"Everything is built into Azure, and if we go for cross-cloud development with Azure Arc, we can use most of the features. While it's possible to deploy and convert third-party applications, it is difficult to maintain, whereas Azure deployments to the cloud are always easier. Also, Microsoft is a big company, so they always provide enough support, and we trust the Microsoft brand."
"The integration with Logic Apps allows for automated responses to incidents."
"Microsoft Defender has a lot of features including regulatory compliance and attaching workbooks but the most valuable is the recommendations it provides for each and every resource when we open Microsoft Defender."
"It works seamlessly on the Azure platform because it's a Microsoft app. Its setup is similar, so if you already have a Microsoft account, it just flows into it."
"It isn't a highly complex solution. It's something that a lot of analysts can use. Defender gives you a broad overview of what's happening in your environment, and it's a great solution if you're a Microsoft shop."
"Good compliance policies."
"Threat protection is comprehensive and simple."
"One area for improvement is the notification system for secret expiration. It would be beneficial if the service could handle this more autonomously, eliminating the need for additional integrations."
"Inability to access the solution on the phone."
"Azure has great documentation, but I would like to see more use cases pertaining to specific industries. For example, case studies on how to use HIPAA compliant solutions in the healthcare industry or how to use PCI compliant data analytics solutions in the financial technology industry would be helpful."
"It needs to offer dynamic secrets management."
"I can see that other people are doing the infrastructure as code, they are able to easily manage and cycle their passwords as needed using their own interface they created. It would be nice if Microsoft provided more guidance in that area."
"I would like more code examples."
"The solution needs to improve its cost."
"We've experienced issues with configuration."
"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."
"Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research."
"Another thing is that Defender for Cloud uses more resources than CrowdStrike, which my current company uses. Defender for Cloud has two or three processes running simultaneously that consume memory and processor time. I had the chance to compare that with CrowdStrike a few days ago, which was significantly less. It would be nice if Defender were a little lighter. It's a relatively large installation that consumes more resources than competitors do."
"For Kubernetes, I was using Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS). To see that whatever is getting deployed into AKS goes through the correct checks and balances in terms of affinities and other similar aspects and follows all the policies, we had to use a product called Stackrox. At a granular level, the built-in policies were good for Kubernetes, but to protect our containers from a coding point of view, we had to use a few other products. For example, from a programming point of view, we were using Checkmarx for static code analysis. For CIS compliance, there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, we had to use other plugins to see that the CIS benchmarks are compliant. There are CIS benchmarks for Kubernetes on AWS and GCP, but there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, Azure Security Center fell short from the regulatory compliance point of view, and we had to use one more product. We ended up with two different dashboards. We had Azure Security Center, and we had Stackrox that had its own dashboard. The operations team and the security team had to look at two dashboards, and they couldn't get an integrated piece. That's a drawback of Azure Security Center. Azure Security Center should provide APIs so that we can integrate its dashboard within other enterprise dashboards, such as the PowerBI dashboard. We couldn't get through these aspects, and we ended up giving Reader security permission to too many people, which was okay to some extent, but when we had to administer the users for the Stackrox portal and Azure Security Center, it became painful."
"The overview provides you with good information, but if you want more details, there is a lot more customization to do, which requires knowledge of the other supporting solutions."
"The product must improve its UI."
"From my own perspective, they just need a product that is tailored to micro-segmentation so I can configure rules for multiple systems at once and manage it."
"The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."
Azure Key Vault is ranked 11th in Microsoft Security Suite with 46 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 2nd in Microsoft Security Suite with 46 reviews. Azure Key Vault is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Key Vault writes "Allows us to securely store our keys to prevent unauthorized access to unwanted users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". Azure Key Vault is most compared with AWS Secrets Manager, HashiCorp Vault, CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault, AWS Certificate Manager and Delinea Secret Server, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Azure Key Vault vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.
See our list of best Microsoft Security Suite vendors.
We monitor all Microsoft Security Suite 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.
