We performed a comparison between CoreOS Clair and Tenable.io Container Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"The management console is the most valuable feature."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"The UI is very good."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"I'd like to see better onboarding documentation."
"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"I would like additional integrations."
"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."
"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."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"Sometimes the Storyline ID is a bit wacky."
"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
"The stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
CoreOS Clair is ranked 26th in Container Security with 1 review while Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 21st in Container Security with 7 reviews. CoreOS Clair is rated 8.0, while Tenable.io Container Security is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CoreOS Clair writes "Excellent detection accuracy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". CoreOS Clair is most compared with JFrog Xray, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Snyk, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Aqua Cloud Security Platform, whereas Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Trivy and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
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.