We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender for Cloud and Tenable Cloud Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"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."
"We really appreciate the Slack integration. When we have an incident, we get an instant notification. We also use Joe Sandbox, which Singularity can integrate with, so we can verify if a threat is legitimate."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"It used to guide me about an alert. There is something called an alert guide. I used to click on the alert guide, and I could read everything. I could read about the alert and how to resolve it. I used to love that feature."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"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."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
"Defender is a robust platform for dealing with many kinds of threats. We're protected from various threats, like viruses. Attacks can be easily minimized with this solution defending our infrastructure."
"One important security feature is the incident alerts. Now, with all these cyberattacks, there are a lot of incident alerts that get triggered. It is very difficult to keep monitoring everything automatically, instead our organization is utilizing the automated use case that we get from Microsoft. That has helped bring down the manual work for a lot of things."
"It's got a lot of great features."
"Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled."
"Defender lets you orchestrate the roll-out from a single pane. Using the Azure portal, you can roll it out over all the servers covered by the entire subscription."
"The key benefit lies in having the largest and most up-to-date database. When it comes to using any Tenable product, it excels in finding vulnerabilities and providing analytics."
"The tool alerts us on depreciating performance or deficiencies of our web application. It helps us react on time."
"The product's visibility and remediation work fine for me."
"Ermetic can provide super visibility for our cloud environment (we are using AWS)."
"The solution’s vulnerability management feature has helped us identify and mitigate risks well."
"If you have multi-cloud tenancy using AWS and Azure, you can have a single dashboard where you can onboard all the cloud infrastructure and have visibility into it."
"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."
"A beneficial improvement for PingSafe would be integration with Jira, allowing for a more streamlined ticketing system."
"We use PingSafe and also SentinelOne. If PingSafe integrated some of the endpoint security features of SentinelOne, it would be the perfect one-stop solution for everything. We wouldn't need to switch between the products. At my organization, I am responsible for endpoint security and vulnerability management. Integrating both functions into one application would be ideal because I could see all the alerts, heat maps, and reports in one console."
"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."
"The Kubernetes scanning on the Oracle Cloud needs to be improved. It's on the roadmap. AWS has this capability, but it's unavailable for Oracle Cloud."
"Whenever I view the processes and the process aspect, it takes a long time to load."
"PingSafe is an excellent CSPM tool, but the CWPP features need to improve, and there is a scope for more application security posture management features. There aren't many ASPM solutions on the market, and existing ones are costly. I would like to see PingSafe develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM, CSPM, and CWPP. Another feature I'd like to see is runtime protection."
"I export CSV. I cannot export graphs. Restricting it to the CSV format has its own disadvantages. These are all machine IP addresses and information. I cannot change it to the JSON format. The export functionality can be improved."
"After getting a recommendation, it takes time for the solution to refresh properly to show that the problem has been eliminated."
"Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."
"I would suggest building a single product that addresses endpoint server protection, attack surface, and everything else in one solution. That is the main disadvantage with the product. If we are incorporating some features, we end up in a situation where this solution is for the server, and that one is for the client, or this is for identity, and that is for our application. They're not bundling it. Commercially, we can charge for different licenses, but on the implementation side, it's tough to help our end-customer understand which product they're getting."
"Microsoft sources most of their threat intelligence internally, but I think they should open themselves up to bodies that provide feel intelligence to build a better engine. There may be threats out there that they don't report because their team is not doing anything on that and they don't have arrangements with another party that is involved in that research."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"Most of the time, when we log into the support, we don't get a chance to interact with Microsoft employees directly, except having it go to outsource employees of Microsoft. The initial interaction has not been that great because outsourced companies cannot provide the kind of quality or technical expertise that we look for. We have a technical manager from Microsoft, but they are kind of average unless we make noise and ask them to escalate. We then can get the right people and the right solution, but it definitely takes time."
"Another thing is that Defender for Cloud uses more resources than CrowdStrike, which my current company uses. Defender for Cloud has two or three processes running simultaneously that consume memory and processor time. I had the chance to compare that with CrowdStrike a few days ago, which was significantly less. It would be nice if Defender were a little lighter. It's a relatively large installation that consumes more resources than competitors do."
"The remediation process could be improved."
"There is a need for the support team to improve their response time since it is one of the areas where the product's technical team has certain shortcomings."
"I do think there might be room for more integrations. This could allow for further customization and flexibility, essentially offering different functionality options to accommodate various budgets."
"I didn't find anything that wasn't useful or needed to be added."
"Ermetic needs to improve its security scanning. I would like to see more dynamic graphical forms."
"The product must provide more features."
"If Tenable Cloud Security offers a complete Cnapp solution with CWP, CIEM, and Waap security, it will be able to compete with other competitors."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 46 reviews while Tenable Cloud Security is ranked 15th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 6 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while Tenable Cloud Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable Cloud Security writes "Provides excellent features and helps identify and mitigate risks". Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Tenable Cloud Security is most compared with Wiz, Orca Security, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Amazon Inspector and Tenable Security Center. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Tenable Cloud Security report.
See our list of best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.