We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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."It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"They're responsive to feature requests. If I suggest a feature for Prisma, I will need to wait until the next release on their roadmap. Cloud Native Security will add it right away."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"It is scalable, stable, and can detect any threat on a machine. It uses artificial intelligence and can lock down any virus."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"The most valuable features of AKS are rollback updates, high availability, easy management, speedy execution and deployment."
"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 deploy."
"The solution is a managed Kubernetes, so much of the maintenance in the control plane is handled automatically by the cloud service provider."
"The most valuable feature is the autoscaling and self-healing."
"The product’s most valuable features are ease of use and automation."
"The serverless capability and auto scale feature are the most valuable."
"We find the container orchestration tool that this solution provides to be very valuable."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"The technical support is good."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"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."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"The integration with Oracle has room for improvement."
"I would like PingSafe to add real-time detection of vulnerabilities and cloud misconfigurations."
"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."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"In some cases, the rules are strictly enforced but do not align with real-world use cases."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"The application firewall is lacking some features and there is room for enhancement."
"It just loses out because you have less access to it programmatically, with less technical or customizable access."
"I would like to see the stability get more synchronized."
"Configuration management and troubleshooting performance issues are difficult to solve and could be made easier."
"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."
"The solution's cost could be cheaper."
"The solution should improve its UI and cost."
"One area that could be improved is the Azure CLI. It would be beneficial if they could abstract some of the complexities related to deployment scripts and make them a part of Azure CLI."
"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 deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"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."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
More Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4. 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 Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher and Qualys VMDR, whereas 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 Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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.
