We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Secureworks Taegis XDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP).
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"It is scalable, stable, and can detect any threat on a machine. It uses artificial intelligence and can lock down any virus."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"The most valuable aspects of PingSafe are its alerting system and the remediation guidance it provides."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"My favorite feature is Storyline."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"The UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"The solution's robust security posture is the most valuable feature."
"The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative."
"It has seamless integration with any of the services I mentioned, on Azure, such as IaaS platforms, virtual machines, applications, or databases, because it's an in-house product from Microsoft within the Azure ecosystem."
"We can create alerts that trigger if there is any malicious activity happening in the workflow and these alerts can be retrieved using the query language."
"This is a platform as a service provided by Azure. We don't need to install or maintain Azure Security Center. It is a ready-made service available in Azure. This is one of the main things that we like. If you look at similar tools, we have to install, maintain, and update services. Whereas, Azure Security Center manages what we are using. This is a good feature that has helped us a lot."
"We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
"DSPM is the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"It's a complete solution package."
"PingSafe can improve by eliminating 100 percent of the false positives."
"There is no break-glass account feature. They should implement this as soon as possible because we can't implement SSO without a break-glass feature."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"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."
"The solution could improve by being more intuitive and easier to use requiring less technical knowledge."
"After getting a recommendation, it takes time for the solution to refresh properly to show that the problem has been eliminated."
"Customizing some of the compliance requirements based on individual needs seems like the biggest area of improvement. There should be an option to turn specific controls on and off based on how your solution is configured."
"Agent features need to be improved. They support agents through Azure Arc or Workbench. Sometimes, we are not able to get correct signals from the machines on which we have installed these agents. We are not able to see how many are currently reporting to Azure Security Center, and how many are currently not reporting. For example, we have 1,000 machines, and we have enrolled 1,000 OMS agents on these machines to collect the log. When I look at the status, even though at some places, it shows that it is connected, but when I actually go and check, I'm not getting any alerts from those. There are some discrepancies on the agent, and the agent features are not up to the mark."
"Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."
"Azure's system could be more on point like AWS support. For example, if I have an issue with AWS, I create a support ticket, then I get a call or a message. With Azure support, you raise a ticket, and somebody calls back depending on their availability and the priority, which might not align with your business priority."
"I would like to see better automation when it comes to pushing out security features to the recommendations, and better documentation on the step-by-step procedures for enabling certain features."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"The pricing could be improved."
"We found limitations in the XDR's detections, lacking the ability to create customized detection and log parsing rules."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 46 reviews while Secureworks Taegis XDR is ranked 28th in Extended Detection and Response (XDR) with 2 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while Secureworks Taegis XDR is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Secureworks Taegis XDR writes " It's a complete solution package". 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, whereas Secureworks Taegis XDR is most compared with Microsoft Defender XDR, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Wazuh, CrowdStrike Falcon and IBM Security QRadar.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.
