We performed a comparison between CoreOS Clair and Tenable.io Container Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"My favorite feature is Storyline."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"The offensive security where they do a fix is valuable. They go to a misconfiguration and provide detailed alerts on what could be there. They also provide a remediation feature where if we give the permission, they can also go and fix the issue."
"PingSafe offers security solutions for both Kubernetes and CI/CD pipelines."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"The recommended actions aren't always specific, so it might suggest recommendations that don't apply to the particular infrastructure code I'm reviewing."
"They could generally give us better comprehensive rules."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"Crafting customized policies can be tricky."
"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"The stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
CoreOS Clair is ranked 26th in Container Security with 1 review while Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 21st in Container Security with 7 reviews. CoreOS Clair is rated 8.0, while Tenable.io Container Security is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CoreOS Clair writes "Excellent detection accuracy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". CoreOS Clair is most compared with JFrog Xray, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Snyk, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Aqua Cloud Security Platform, whereas Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Trivy and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
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.