We performed a comparison between AWS GuardDuty and Crowdstrike Falcon Cloud Security based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, AWS GuardDuty comes out ahead of Crowdstrike Falcon Cloud Security. Our reviewers found that the cloud options of Crowdstrike Falcon Cloud Security may be more expensive, which could be a disadvantage for some businesses with budget constraints.
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are cloud misconfiguration, Kubernetes, and IaC scanning."
"As a frequently audited company, we value PingSafe's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."
"The management console is the most valuable feature."
"PingSafe released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. PingSafe's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."
"The real-time detection and response capabilities overall are great."
"The remediation process is good."
"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."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"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."
"The product has automated protection powered by AI/ML, which is now far more powerful than before. It uses AI/ML in its detection algorithm, providing fast and quick results."
"It is a highly scalable solution since it is a service by AWS. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Deployment is great, and we didn't face any big challenges."
"Since our environment is cloud based and accessible from the internet, we like the ability to check where the user has logged in from and what kind of API calls that user is doing."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"Cloud security posture management (CSPM) is most valuable."
"It is fully cloud-based, so we don't need to invest in third-party agents repeatedly."
"Technical support is helpful."
"It's easy to gather insights and conduct analysis about existing threats."
"There is a lot that it can do, but endpoint protection is the main thing about it. The fact that it uses machine learning and artificial intelligence to monitor and remediate the issues in real-time is probably the bread and butter of the product."
"CrowdStrike utilizes signatureless technology, eliminating the need for regular signature updates on endpoint systems."
"The most significant benefit is how quickly malware and other malicious attacks are detected."
"The immediate mitigation of potential threats and instant alerts are valuable."
"We don't get any notifications from PingSafe when the clusters are down."
"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."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"I would like PingSafe to add real-time detection of vulnerabilities and cloud misconfigurations."
"In some cases, the rules are strictly enforced but do not align with real-world use cases."
"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."
"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."
"We currently find Lacework to be much better at detecting vulnerabilities than AWS GuardDuty. The engines of AWS GuardDuty have to be improved."
"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."
"I work in a bank, and it would be good if AWS GuardDuty could be integrated with other monitoring and detection tools we use."
"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."
"It is evolving, and at the moment, I will just need it on a larger scale. Then, it will satisfy my demand, initially."
"For the next release, they could provide IPS features as well."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
"The only suggestion for improvement would be the pricing."
"The only challenge lies in token verification."
"There should be cloud storage scanning. We would like to have cloud storage vulnerability and threat management on any cloud storage."
"Different file options should be available, and clients should be able to select from the options."
"It gets the work done, but the main problem with the solution is that if you remediate anything, it takes 45 days for you to get any of the features displayed on the dashboard. This is the real weakness of CrowdStrike. Their customer support is also not ready to help with it. If you remediate any cloud vulnerability that they are giving you, such as removing a host from your organization, it takes around 45 days for them to remove it from their console."
"One area for improvement in Falcon Cloud Security is the support portal."
"The CrowdStrike dashboard currently lacks a username field."
"CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is expensive."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews while CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is ranked 8th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 13 reviews. AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2, while CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security writes "Enhances the overall safety of our company's environment from cyber threats". AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, whereas CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Qualys VMDR, Sysdig Falco and Akamai Guardicore Segmentation. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security 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.