We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Qualys VMDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"The mean time to detect has been reduced."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"The solution helped free other staff to work on other projects or other tasks. We basically just had to do a bunch of upfront configuring. With it, we do not have to spend as much time in the console."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"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."
"I found the Helm deployment feature of the solution valuable."
"We find the container orchestration tool that this solution provides to be very valuable."
"The tool is budget-friendly."
"I have enjoyed working with all the features."
"It is easy to deploy."
"It is appealing to us due to its complexity, which aligns well with our requirements."
"The product has built-in functionality that checks whether the service is available or not. In case the service is down, the tool will create a new instance by default. Hence, the web API will be always up irrespective of the server or the situation."
"It is easy to maintain the solution."
"The most valuable feature is that this solution is very lightweight."
"Great web application security for scanning."
"This solution gives us insight into our environment and improves our security. It helps us to maintain a good patching system whereby we know that XYZ is vulnerable within the system."
"The Vulnerability Management and Patch Management features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Qualys VM's best feature is vulnerability management."
"It is quite easy to implement."
"The most valuable features are vulnerability scanning, policy compliance scanning, and tablet for web application scanning."
"Technical support is fantastic."
"When we get a new finding from PingSafe, I wish we could get an alert in the console, so we can work on it before we see it in the report. It would be very useful for the team that is actively working on the PingSafe platform, so we can close the issue the same day before it appears in the daily report."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"I want PingSafe to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, PingSafe is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If PingSafe had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"There is no break-glass account feature. They should implement this as soon as possible because we can't implement SSO without a break-glass feature."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"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."
"Their search feature could be better."
"The initial setup of AKS is complicated. The setup depends on the cluster, nodes, and lots of other things. There are also lots of extremely critical small devices. Moreover, you will have to pay them even while setting up the solution. It is not like you setup first and then pay for it."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"I would like to see the stability get more synchronized."
"The engineering team can reduce the management of the platform itself by improving the data plane part of the system to upload more management."
"We would like to see the addition of a service report from the server for this solution, so that we can monitor the health of server operations."
"AKS has the potential to enhance pricing by enabling us to explore ways to increase cost transparency. However, it's important to note that this refers to computation costs rather than client costs. Our objective is to optimize efficiency and minimize unnecessary expenses. Therefore, we aim to identify which services within the platform can benefit from improved consumption patterns. This is the focus of our ongoing research, with the goal of maximizing computational power within the cluster. We aim to avoid situations where resources are reserved but not utilized effectively. Additionally, our strong emphasis on security ensures that we adhere to all relevant compliance standards, bolstering our overall trustworthiness."
"Sometimes, it fails to provide specific metrics."
"Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is not up to optimal standards when it comes to capturing logs and visualization."
"Qualys VM's vulnerability scan could be improved, especially the number of CVE numbers it can manage at a time."
"Make some minimal dashboard improvements."
"Qualys VM should improve its methodology."
"We are moving away from Qualys to Defender ATP because I find that Defender ATP is much better at prioritizing the vulnerabilities that I should be looking at."
"One of the biggest issues from the clients' perspective is that all Qualys computing is on the cloud."
"Qualys VM could improve by having more skilled support personnel."
"If anything, I would like to see the user interface modernized a bit more."
"It is more expensive vs. other products on the market."
More Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 11th in Container Security with 77 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher and Tenable.io Container Security, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Qualys VMDR 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.
