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.
"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."
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are cloud misconfiguration, Kubernetes, and IaC scanning."
"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 mean time to detect has been reduced."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"PingSafe offers comprehensive security posture management."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar to a sandbox environment."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"Aqua Security helps us to check the vulnerability of image assurance and check for malware."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"The way it monitors accounts is definitely a very important feature."
"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."
"One of the advantages of cloud services is the ability to use them on demand. There's minimal installation involved; you can check the latest offerings and make new deployments while dismantling the previous ones. This approach keeps you ahead of potential services, showcasing the agility of AWS."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"It is a highly scalable solution since it is a service by AWS. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"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."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"There's an array of upcoming versions with numerous features to be incorporated into the roadmap. Customers particularly appreciate the service's emphasis on intensive security, especially the secret scanning aspect. During the proof of concept (POC) phase, the system is required to gather logs from the customer's environment. This process entails obtaining specific permissions, especially in terms of gateway access. While most permissions for POC are manageable, the need for various permissions may need improvement, especially in the context of security."
"I'd like to see better onboarding documentation."
"PingSafe's current documentation could be improved to better assist customers during the cluster onboarding process."
"I would like additional integrations."
"They could generally give us better comprehensive rules."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"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."
"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."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"For me, I would say just the presentation of findings, like the dashboards and other stuff, could be improved a bit."
"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."
"One improvement I would suggest for AWS GuardDuty is the ability to assign findings to specific users or groups, facilitating better communication and follow-up actions."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
"AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented."
"Amazon GuardDuty could be better enriched in threat intelligence data."
"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."
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.