We performed a comparison between Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is highly regarded for its extensive visibility and management features, including Cloud Security Posture Management and container security. On the other hand, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes receives acclaim for its excellent resource-sharing and segmentation capabilities. Prisma Cloud could be more customizable and integrate with ticketing solutions better. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes requires enhancements in testing, documentation, usability, and stability.
Service and Support: Some Prisma Cloud customers have called Palo Alto support exceptional and prompt, while others have reported sluggish response times. Customers have generally provided positive remarks about the customer service offered by Red Hat, deeming it to be of high quality.
Ease of Deployment: Some Prisma Cloud users found the setup process to be simple, but others said it was somewhat complicated. The deployment time varies depending on the customer environment. The setup for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes involves creating multiple customer resource files and deploying the desired image as a container. The setup is considered moderately easy and the deployment time varies based on the customer's needs, with financial institutions typically taking longer.
Pricing: Users have differing opinions on the setup cost of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, but many find it to be reasonable and competitive. On the other hand, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is moderately priced and offers subscription-based options along with a bundled price.
ROI: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has proven to be highly effective at preventing breaches, enhancing risk visibility, streamlining operations, and mitigating cyberattack threats. Users have provided limited feedback regarding the ROI of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
Comparison Results: Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is preferred over Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Prisma Cloud offers comprehensive visibility and management options through a user-friendly web GUI. Users appreciate its anomaly detection abilities, seamless integration with other tools, and the ability to provide security across multi- and hybrid-cloud environments. Compared to Prisma Cloud, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes falls short in terms of usability, documentation, and stability.
"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"The solution helped free other staff to work on other projects or other tasks. We basically just had to do a bunch of upfront configuring. With it, we do not have to spend as much time in the console."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"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 agentless vulnerability scanning is great."
"I did a lot of research before signing up and doing the demo. They have a good reputation as far as catching threats early on."
"PingSafe can integrate all your cloud accounts and resources you create in the AWS account, We have set it up to scan the AWS transfer services, EC2, security groups, and GitHub."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"I was looking for a vulnerability scanner and I was looking for one place in which I could find everything. This tool not only does vulnerability scanning, but it also gives me an asset management tool."
"What I like most about Prisma Cloud is its zero-day signatures, maximum security, minimal downtime, cloud visibility, control, and ease of deployment."
"It helps to identify the misconfigurations by monitoring regularly which helps to secure the organization's cloud environment."
"The solution's dashboard looks very user-friendly."
"It has improved the overall collaboration between SecOps and DevOps. Now, instead of asking people to do something, it is a default offering in the CI/CD. There is less manual intervention and more seamless integration. It is why we don't have many dependencies across many teams, which is definitely a better state."
"The most valuable feature is that the rule set is managed and that it can be run on a regularly scheduled basis."
"The CVEs are valuable because we used to have a tool to scan CVEs, at the language level, for the dependencies that our developers had. What is good about Prisma Cloud is that the CVEs are not only from the software layer, but from all layers: the language, the base image, and you also have CVEs from the host. It covers the full base of security."
"Integrating with a CI/CD pipeline and incorporating a vulnerability assessment process are highly effective features, especially when combined with runtime protection."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"The technical support is good."
"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."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"For vulnerabilities, they are showing CVE ID. The naming convention should be better so that it indicates the container where a vulnerability is present. Currently, they are only showing CVE ID, but the same CVE ID might be present in multiple containers. We would like to have the container name so that we can easily fix the issue."
"While it is good, I think the solution's console could be improved."
"After closing an alert in Cloud Native Security, it still shows as unresolved."
"Their search feature could 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."
"PingSafe can be improved by developing a comprehensive set of features that allow for automated workflows."
"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."
"With Cloud Native Security, we can't selectively enable or disable alerts based on our specific use case."
"Sometimes, when you assign subnets to regions, the IP address will jump from one location to another because it will automatically change substantially. Then, we need to add those IP subnets to our firewall for existing access. The need to update those subnets potentially causes maintenance or access issues. So far, we can only provide bigger customers with six subnets, and a small company may not be able to access those services."
"Based on my experience, the customization—especially the interface and some of the product identification components—is not as customizable as it could be. But it makes up for that with the fact that we can access the API and then build our own systems to read the data and then process and parse it and hand it to our teams."
"I would like Prisma Cloud to improve its mapping feature to increase usability."
"The first time I looked at Prisma Cloud, it took me a while to understand how to implement the integration or how to enable features by using the interface for integration. That portion can probably be improved."
"The automation capabilities are growing each day, but the problem is that the updates are not that frequent. There are some services on Amazon that have come out with updates, and Azure is also getting up to date. But Prisma takes some time to follow. There's a time gap that Prisma inherits from these clouds. I understand why it takes some time, but that time should be reduced."
"The alignment of Twistlock Defender agents with image repositories needs improvement. These deployed agents have no way of differentiating between on-premise and cloud-based image repositories. If I deploy a Defender agent to secure an on-premise Kubernetes cluster, that agent also tries to scan my ECR image repositories on AWS. So, we have limited options for aligning those Defenders with the repositories that we want them to scan. It is scanning everything rather than giving us the ability to be real granular in choosing which agents can scan which repositories."
"This solution is more AWS and Azure-centric. It needs to be more specific on the GCP side, which they are working on."
"We are encountering issues with the new permissions required for AWS integration with Prisma."
"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 solution's price could be better."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"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."
"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's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The testing process could be improved."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Container Security with 82 reviews while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4, while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". 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 ". Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub and Orca Security, whereas Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Sysdig Secure and Qualys VMDR. See our Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks 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.