We performed a comparison between Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and SUSE NeuVector based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives praise for its resource-sharing capabilities, segmentation, reliable performance, and user-friendly web interface. SUSE NeuVector is praised for its wide range of features, informative user interface, ISO certification checks, and automation capabilities. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes could improve by enhancing testing capabilities, making command line and configuration processes easier, and incorporating zero trust and access control measures. SUSE NeuVector needs to expand scanning support and work on monitoring, reporting, and integration.
Service and Support: Customers using Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes gave feedback and regard the support they receive as being of high quality. SUSE NeuVector's support is praised for being supportive, prompt, and well-informed, although a few reviewers consider the process to be complex.
Ease of Deployment: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions. Some reviewers think setting up SUSE NeuVector is straightforward, while others find it complex and challenging. Integrating SUSE NeuVector with pipelines is particularly difficult, often requiring the use of custom scripts.
Pricing: Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions. The pricing and licensing experiences of SUSE NeuVector users vary, with some considering it affordable and others indicating a need for improvement.
ROI: Our users have given no feedback on the ROI of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes so far. SUSE NeuVector provides the largest ROI for high-risk sectors such as financial services, although its benefits may be limited for some sectors, such as retail.
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"I did a lot of research before signing up and doing the demo. They have a good reputation as far as catching threats early on."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"PingSafe's most valuable feature is its unified console."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"The UI is very good."
"Cloud Native Security helps us discover vulnerabilities in a cloud environment like open ports that allow people to attack our environment. If someone unintentionally opens a port, we are exposed. Cloud Native Security alerts us so we can remediate the problem. We can also automate it so that Cloud Native Security will fix it."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"In some cases, the rules are strictly enforced but do not align with real-world use cases."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 19th in Container Security with 7 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Qualys VMDR and Sysdig Secure, whereas SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Sysdig Falco, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Secure and Snyk. See our Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. SUSE NeuVector 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.