We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and AttackIQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Cymulate, Picus Security and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)."Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"Overall, I've had a good experience with the product. It's worked well for me."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"The initial setup was quite difficult and took a long time."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 4th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 17 reviews while AttackIQ is ranked 7th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while AttackIQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AttackIQ writes "Overall, a good user experience and works well but is hard to set up". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas AttackIQ is most compared with Pentera, Picus Security, SafeBreach and Cymulate.
See our list of best Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) vendors.
We monitor all Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) 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.
