We performed a comparison between Tenable.io Container Security and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Tenable.io Container Security excels at analyzing vulnerabilities and identifying misconfiguration. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives praise for its resource-sharing capabilities, segmentation, reliable performance, and user-friendly web interface. Tenable.io could improve by automating remediation and CIS benchmarks while enhancing asset visibility and implementing customizable compliance options. 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.
Service and Support: Some users encountered technical issues when contacting Tenable.io support. Customers using Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes gave feedback and regard the support they receive as being of high quality.
Ease of Deployment: Tenable.io Container Security comes with clear setup documentation, making the deployment process smooth. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes requires considerable time and effort to deploy due to its complex configuration process.
Pricing: Tenable.io Container Security's setup cost is determined by the application's page count. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and cheaper if purchased in a bundle with other Red Hat solutions.
Comparison Results: Tenable.io Container Security is preferred over Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Tenable.io Container Security offers a smooth setup process with helpful guidebooks, quick deployment, and the ability to identify misconfigurations before going live. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes has a more complicated setup process, requires more resources for deployment, and lacks certain features offered by other solutions.
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"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."
"It is very straightforward. It is not complicated. For the information that it provides, it does a pretty good job."
"As a frequently audited company, we value PingSafe's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."
"Atlas security graph is pretty cool. It maps out relationships between components on AWS, like load balancers and servers. This helps visualize potential attack paths and even suggests attack paths a malicious actor might take."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"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."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"The technical support is good."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"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 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 tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"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 strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"When you find a vulnerability and resolve it, the same issue will not occur again. I want PingSafe to block the same vulnerability from appearing again. I want something like a playbook where the steps that we take to resolve an issue are repeated when that issue happens again."
"PingSafe is an excellent CSPM tool, but the CWPP features need to improve, and there is a scope for more application security posture management features. There aren't many ASPM solutions on the market, and existing ones are costly. I would like to see PingSafe develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM, CSPM, and CWPP. Another feature I'd like to see is runtime protection."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"The Automation tab is an add-on that doesn’t work properly. They provide a list of scripts that don’t work and I have asked support to assist but they won’t help. When running on various endpoints the script doesn’t work and if it does, it’s only a couple. There are a lot of useful scripts that would be beneficial to run forensics, event logs, and process lists running on the endpoint."
"We are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"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."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"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."
"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 documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"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."
"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 initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"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."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews while Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 21st in Container Security with 7 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while Tenable.io Container Security 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 Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and CoreOS Clair, whereas Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Trivy and SUSE NeuVector. See our Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. Tenable.io Container 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.
