We performed a comparison between Sysdig Secure and Lacework based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Sysdig Secure stands out for its seamless integration with cloud services, strong DevSecOps capabilities, reliable runtime security, and efficient log monitoring. Lacework distinguishes itself with its simplicity, advanced anomaly detection, and comprehensive compliance reporting. Sysdig Secure users say the solution should improve Cloud Security Posture Management while making the dashboard simpler and more customizable. Lacework needs enhancements in visibility, identity and access management, and data governance.
Service and Support: Sysdig Secure users describe the support team as excellent and well-informed. Lacework's customer service has been praised as responsive and efficient. Customers appreciate the regular check-ins, updates, and the availability of escalation options for difficult problems.
Ease of Deployment: Users say Sysdig Secure's setup isn’t complex if customers have skilled personnel or a dedicated team. Lacework’s setup is somewhat complicated and may require several weeks to complete.
Pricing: Sysdig Secure licensing is considered flexible and reasonable. The cost varies depending on factors like the number of agents used and the user's environment. Lacework’s pricing is considered reasonable and transparent, with no additional fees.
ROI: Sysdig Secure users have provided no feedback on ROI so far. Users said Lacework saves time by automating monitoring and ticket generation.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Sysdig Secure over Lacework. Users appreciate the comprehensiveness, versatility, and integration with major cloud platforms Sysdig Secure offers. They value its runtime security, open-source tool Falco, and log monitor feature. Users have mentioned areas of improvement for Lacework, such as visibility, compliance metrics, IAM security control, and data governance. They also emphasize the need for easier configuration of alerts and integration with other systems.
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"The offensive security where they do a fix is valuable. They go to a misconfiguration and provide detailed alerts on what could be there. They also provide a remediation feature where if we give the permission, they can also go and fix the issue."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"The real-time detection and response capabilities overall are great."
"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."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"We really appreciate the Slack integration. When we have an incident, we get an instant notification. We also use Joe Sandbox, which Singularity can integrate with, so we can verify if a threat is legitimate."
"There are many valuable features that I use in my daily work. The first are alerts and the event dossier that it generates, based on the severity. That is very insightful and helps me to have a security cap in our infrastructure. The second thing I like is the agent-based vulnerability management, which is the most accurate information."
"The compliance reports are definitely most valuable because they save time and are accurate. So, instead of relying on a human going through and checking or providing me with a report, I could just log into Lacework and see for myself."
"Lacework is helping a lot in reducing the noise of the alerts. Usually, whenever you have a tool in place, you have a lot of noise in terms of alerts, but the time for an engineer to look into those alerts is limited. Lacework is helping us to consolidate the information that we are getting from the agents and other sources. We are able to focus only on the things that matter, which is the most valuable thing for us. It saves time, and for investigations, we have the right context to take action."
"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."
"The most valuable feature, from a compliance perspective, is the ability to use Lacework as a platform for multiple compliance standards. We have to meet multiple standards like PCI, SOC 2, CIS, and whatever else is out there. The ability to have reports generated, per security standard, is one of the best features for me."
"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."
"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."
"Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offers, along with the ability to identify and address misconfigurations, is invaluable. When such issues arise, we promptly acknowledge and take action, effectively collaborating with our teams and the responsible parties for those assets. This enables us to promptly manage problems as soon as they arise."
"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."
"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."
"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."
"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."
"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."
"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."
"The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying to do, he proactively takes that as an investigation topic and looks into it. He'll provide the solution even though we might not have asked him to investigate it."
"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."
"There's room for improvement in the graphic explorer."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"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."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."
"Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them."
"A feature that I have requested from them is the ability to sort alerts and policies based on a security framework. Right now, when you go into alerts, you have hundreds and hundreds of them that you have to manually pick. It would be useful to have categories for CIS Benchmark or SOC 2 and be able to display all the alerts and policies for one security framework."
"The configuration and setup of alerts should be easier. They should make it easier to integrate with systems like Slack and Datadog. I didn't spend too much time on it, but to me, it wasn't as simple as the alerting that I've seen on other systems."
"The biggest thing I would like to see improved is for them to pursue and obtain a FedRAMP moderate authorization... I don't believe they have any immediate plans to get FedRAMP moderate authorized, which is a bit of a challenge for us because we can only use Lacework in our commercial environment."
"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."
"Lacework has not reduced the number of alerts we get. We've actually had to add resources as a result of using it because the application requires a lot of people to understand it to get the value out of it properly."
"Lacework lacks remediation features, but I believe they're working on that. They're focused on the reporting aspect, but other features need to improve. They're also adding some compliance features, so it's not worth saying they need to get better at it."
"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."
"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."
"The dashboard could be more simple and show the more important issues that are detected first. We'd like to be able to set it up so more important issues show up more prominently in the dashboard."
"Reporting can definitely be better. Live dashboards should be configurable for a longer period of time rather than 30 days. Being able to go back in time to compare six months ago to today would be valuable."
"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."
"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."
"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."
"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Lacework is ranked 9th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 9 reviews while Sysdig Secure is ranked 13th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 9 reviews. Lacework is rated 8.8, while Sysdig Secure is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Lacework writes "Makes us aware of vulnerabilities and provides a lot of data but it's not easily understood at first look". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sysdig Secure writes "A security scanning tool with great insight on your workloads running anywhere". Lacework is most compared with Wiz, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Snyk and Microsoft Defender for Cloud, whereas Sysdig Secure is most compared with Wiz, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Falco, SUSE NeuVector and Qualys VMDR. See our Lacework vs. Sysdig Secure report.
See our list of best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors, best Container Security vendors, and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.