We performed a comparison between Qualys VMDR and SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Performs automated, regular scans in the network."
"The most valuable feature is the certificate management."
"The most valuable features of Qualys VM are its ability to do proper vulnerability assessment. It has a lot of updates for all the vulnerability databases from all over the globe. It's an amazing solution when it comes to the versatility of the features it has. Additionally, the reports are very good. It generates very detailed reports about the vulnerabilities inside the environment"
"Qualys has a continuous endpoint monitoring feature for agent-based scanning. Once you deploy the solution, it monitors everything that is happening every 30 minutes. Then, if there are any vulnerabilities, they are reported."
"Detects new hosts along with vulnerabilities."
"It's very configurable to adjust impact to systems."
"Qualys VM's most valuable feature is automatic detection."
"This solution gives us insight into our environment and improves our security. It helps us to maintain a good patching system whereby we know that XYZ is vulnerable within the system."
"They're responsive to feature requests. If I suggest a feature for Prisma, I will need to wait until the next release on their roadmap. Cloud Native Security will add it right away."
"It is scalable, stable, and can detect any threat on a machine. It uses artificial intelligence and can lock down any virus."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"It is advantageous in terms of time-saving and cost reduction."
"There's real-time threat detection. It can show threats and find issues based on their severity and helps us with real-time monitoring."
"Endpoint stability and fault resolution could be improved."
"We are moving away from Qualys to Defender ATP because I find that Defender ATP is much better at prioritizing the vulnerabilities that I should be looking at."
"The only improvement I can think of is on the implementation side. At times it is a bit slow."
"What we have found is that the solution is not closely tied with the patch management. It is okay with newer ones, like Windows 10 machines; it gives the correct patch. But for Windows 7 or Windows Server 2008, it does not give us the correct patch so we have to manually identify the patches. This is a major problem."
"I do not like that all of the data is stored on the cloud."
"Some of the older features could be polished instead of focusing on releasing new features."
"There needs to be better documentation."
"One of the biggest issues from the clients' perspective is that all Qualys computing is on the cloud."
"For vulnerabilities, they are showing CVE ID. The naming convention should be better so that it indicates the container where a vulnerability is present. Currently, they are only showing CVE ID, but the same CVE ID might be present in multiple containers. We would like to have the container name so that we can easily fix the issue."
"The integration with Oracle has room for improvement."
"I used to work on AWS. At times, I would generate a normal bug in my system, and then I would check PingSafe. The alert used to come after about three and a half hours. It used to take that long to generate the alert about the vulnerability in my system. If a hacker attacks a system and PingSafe takes three to four hours to generate an alert, it will not be beneficial for the company. It would be helpful if we get the alert in five to ten minutes."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"PingSafe can improve by eliminating 100 percent of the false positives."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Qualys VMDR is ranked 11th in Container Security with 77 reviews while SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is ranked 6th in Container Security with 67 reviews. Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2, while SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security writes "Provides excellent workload telemetry, hunting capabilities, and deep visibility ". Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management, whereas SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Orca Security, AWS GuardDuty and Sysdig Secure. See our Qualys VMDR vs. SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security 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.
