We performed a comparison between Aqua Cloud Security Platform and CoreOS Clair based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."When creating cloud infrastructure, Cloud Native Security evaluates the cloud security parameters and how they will impact the organization's risk. It lets us know whether our security parameter conforms to international industry standards. It alerts us about anything that increases our risk, so we can address those vulnerabilities and prevent attacks."
"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"It used to guide me about an alert. There is something called an alert guide. I used to click on the alert guide, and I could read everything. I could read about the alert and how to resolve it. I used to love that feature."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to gain deep visibility into the workloads inside containers."
"The agentless vulnerability scanning is great."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"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 solution was very user-friendly."
"The most helpful feature of Aqua Security is Drift Prevention, which is a feature that allows images to be immutable. In addition, one of the main reasons we went with Aqua Security is because it provides strong protection when it comes to runtime security."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"Support is very helpful."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"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."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"We had a glitch in PingSafe where it fed us false positives in the past."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"Cloud Native Security's reporting could be better. We are unable to see which images are impacted. Several thousand images have been deployed, so if we can see some application-specific information in the dashboard, we can directly send that report to the team that owns the application. We'd also like the option to download the report from the portal instead of waiting for the report to be sent to our email."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"I'd like to see better onboarding documentation."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"I would like Aqua Security to look into is the development of a web security portal."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"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."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 7th in Container Security with 16 reviews while CoreOS Clair is ranked 26th in Container Security with 1 review. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while CoreOS Clair is rated 8.0. 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 CoreOS Clair writes "Excellent detection accuracy". 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 CoreOS Clair is most compared with JFrog Xray, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Snyk, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Qualys VMDR.
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.