We performed a comparison between Aqua Security Platform AWS GuardDuty and based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Aqua Security Platform received positive comments about its container security and malware detection. Users praised AWS GuardDuty for its unified data collection and ability to analyze logs from multiple sources. Aqua Security Platform has room for improvement in automated report delivery and log forwarding. Users would say Aqua is resource heavy, and the user interface could be overhauled. AWS GuardDuty users asked for a mobile version to accommodate remote workers and more analytics in the dashboard.
Service and Support: Customers have generally had positive experiences with Aqua Security Platform customer service, finding them responsive and helpful. However, some customers complained that they were forced to resolve issues themselves. AWS GuardDuty customers have praised the excellent support provided by the Amazon team, citing quick response times. Some noted dissatisfaction with wait times for phone support.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Aqua Security Platform can be either simple or challenging, depending on the environment and user expertise. Some users could easily complete the setup with the help of documentation, but others encountered challenges. AWS GuardDuty's setup was generally considered to be effortless and uncomplicated.
Pricing: Aqua Security Platform is considered to be moderately priced relative to other solutions. AWS GuardDuty has a competitive pay-go pricing model. The cost of AWS GuardDuty is determined by the amount of data processed.
ROI: Aqua Security Platform delivers value by relying on information from trusted sources or direct communication with Aqua Security. AWS GuardDuty boosts security and overall customer trust, potentially opening doors for new business prospects.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer AWS GuardDuty over the Aqua Security Platform. Users like AWS GuardDuty's straightforward setup, whereas some consider Aqua Security Platform to be tricky to deploy. AWS GuardDuty stands out for its ability to provide a single system for data collection and alert mechanisms. Users find its pay-go price model to be flexible and competitive.
"Our previous product took a lot of man hours to manage. Once we got Singularity Cloud Workload Security, it freed up our time to work on other tasks."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"We mostly use alerts. That has been pretty good. If we use the alert system from Amazon, it is much costlier to us, so we use PingSafe."
"Cloud Native Security is user-friendly. Everything in the Cloud Native Security tool is straightforward, including detections, integration, reporting, etc. They are constantly improving their UI by adding plugins and other features."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"Valuable features include the ability to connect it to our Docker Hub where our images are stored, good integration with Slack, and the connection to the CV, to easily see which CVs are on each image."
"The DTA, which stands for Dynamic Threat Analysis, allows me to analyze Docker images in a sandbox environment before deployment, helping me anticipate risks."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"Support is very helpful."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"Aqua Security helps us to check the vulnerability of image assurance and check for malware."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"What I like most about Amazon GuardDuty is that you can monitor your AWS accounts across, but you don't have to pay the additional cost. You can get all your CloudTrail VPC flow logs and DNS logs all in one, and then you get the monitoring with that. A lot of times, if you had a separate tool on-premise, you would have to set up your DNS logs, so usually, Amazon GuardDuty helps with all your additional networking requirements, so I utilize it for continuous monitoring because you can't detect anything if you're not monitoring, and the solution fills that gap. If you don't do anything else first, you can deploy your firewall, and then you've got your Route 53 DNS and DNSSEC, but then Amazon GuardDuty fills that, and then you have audit requirements in AU that says, "Hey, what are your additional logs?", so you can just say, "Hey, we utilize Amazon GuardDuty." You're getting your CloudTrail, your VPC flow logs, and all your DNS logs, and those are your additional logs right there, so the solution meets a lot of requirements. Now, everything comes with a cost, but I also like that the solution also provides threat response and remediation. It's a pretty good product. I've just used it more for log analysis and that's where the value is at, the niche value. Once you do threat detection, it goes into a lot of other integrations you need to implement, so threat detection is only good as the integration, as the user that knows the tools itself, and the architecture and how it's all set up and the rules that you set within that."
"The out-of-band malware detection from the EBS volumes. It's really cool. No agents or anything needed, it automatically finds and correlates based on malware."
"The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action."
"It kinda just gives us another layer of security. So it does provide some sort of comfort that we do have something that is monitoring for abnormal behavior."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"With anomaly detection, active threat monitoring, and set correlation, GuardDuty alerts me to any unusual user behavior or traffic patterns right away, which is great for staying on top of potential security risks."
"It helps us detect brute-force attacks based on machine learning."
"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."
"I used to work on AWS. At times, I would generate a normal bug in my system, and then I would check PingSafe. The alert used to come after about three and a half hours. It used to take that long to generate the alert about the vulnerability in my system. If a hacker attacks a system and PingSafe takes three to four hours to generate an alert, it will not be beneficial for the company. It would be helpful if we get the alert in five to ten minutes."
"The reporting works well, but sometimes the severity classifications are inaccurate. Sometimes, it flags an issue as high-impact, but it should be a lower severity."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"PingSafe filtering has some areas that cause problems, and to achieve single sign-on functionality, a break-glass feature, which is currently unavailable, is necessary."
"The recommended actions aren't always specific, so it might suggest recommendations that don't apply to the particular infrastructure code I'm reviewing."
"The categorization of the results from the vulnerability assessment could be improved."
"Customized queries should be made easier to improve PingSafe."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"There's room for improvement, particularly in management capabilities as it may not be comprehensive enough for all customers, and it has been lacking in the realm of cloud security posture management."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"I would like Aqua Security to look into is the development of a web security portal."
"The solution has to be integrated with new services that AWS adds like QuickSight, Managed Airflow, AppFlow and MWAA."
"For me, I would say just the presentation of findings, like the dashboards and other stuff, could be improved a bit."
"Some of the pain points in Amazon GuardDuty was the cost. When compared to some of the other services, depending on how many we had to monitor, if we had a huge range of accounts, as our accounts increased, we had a cost factor that came into play. Sometimes there were issues, for example, with findings that came up, we wanted to add notes and there were issues back then where notes couldn't be entered properly. If we wanted to leave a note such as "Okay, we have assessed this and this is how we feel", or "This is a false positive", Amazon GuardDuty wasn't allowing us to do that. Even with the suppression of certain findings, there was some issue that we had faced at one time. Those were some of the pain points of the solution."
"While sending the alerts to the email, they are not being patched. we have to do the patching and mapping manually. If GuardDuty could include a feature to do this automatically, it will make our job easier. That is something I believe can be improved."
"We currently find Lacework to be much better at detecting vulnerabilities than AWS GuardDuty. The engines of AWS GuardDuty have to be improved."
"The product needs to improve its cost-efficiency since it is expensive."
"Cost changes. It's very expensive. If you turn on every feature, it's more than most commercial vendors. For smaller orgs, that doesn't make sense."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 11th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 16 reviews while AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "Reliable with good container scanning and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Snyk, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and SUSE NeuVector, whereas AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Illumio. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Aqua Cloud Security Platform report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.