We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Qualys VMDR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of AKS are scalability, deployability, and automation."
"The tool is budget-friendly."
"The product serves the purpose of helping streamline our company's application deployment and scaling processes."
"It employs high availability."
"It is appealing to us due to its complexity, which aligns well with our requirements."
"It is a stable solution."
"I have enjoyed working with all the features."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the diagnostic service."
"I am impressed with the VMDR feature."
"This is one of the best products I have worked with so far. I like the power of Qualys, and it's a better solution because you can scan a compact file, a BIT file, or batch files. The product already knows what's happening inside, and you don't need to expand the package. Tenable will do the same thing, but you need to have a package issuance claim. With Qualys, we can immediately understand the file, even a compact file. If there's some kind of discovery or incident, you will know what happened in the environment."
"Qualys has a continuous endpoint monitoring feature for agent-based scanning. Once you deploy the solution, it monitors everything that is happening every 30 minutes. Then, if there are any vulnerabilities, they are reported."
"Vulnerability management is the most valuable one and it’s a must in every organization."
"There are many features. Its reliability, ease of installation, ease of use, and the richness of the information provided are the most valuable features."
"I find Qualys VM very robust, and it's very useful for vulnerability management and patch management. The value that it brings to my environment is economies of scale. There is no limitation on adding any endpoints. You go by the rule, and it's added once another endpoint is added to our environment. It's automatically installed, and it's less work from our end. It frees up my license automatically if I don't need an endpoint or if my machine is decommissioned. I like the dashboard displays because I don't see any duplication. The most important part is vulnerability management and prioritization. Unlike Symantec, it shows the kind of vulnerability I would want to patch first. It provides a holistic view of the kind of vulnerabilities and the ones I should remediate first. I don't have to do a scan; it just brings up those critical kinds of vulnerabilities like zero-day vulnerabilities and tells me to prioritize them. You have to prioritize these vulnerabilities first and go on with the rest. The dashboard shows me the ones that have been fixed, so I don't have to complete an aging report. The user experience and the graphical interface are good. As it's user-friendly and understandable on an executive level, it brings real value. We also use this solution because it's robust and flexibile."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the external channel."
"The solution shows us classic categories, including high, medium, and low risks. It also shows critical items, and that gives us the advantage of prioritizing things."
"It can be tough to access the servers when onboarding."
"This is a fairly expensive solution, which can make it prohibitive for smaller organizations."
"Unfortunately, when a microservice fails, Azure can take up to 60 seconds to broadcast an alert to the monitoring agents."
"The solution's cost could be cheaper."
"It just loses out because you have less access to it programmatically, with less technical or customizable access."
"The engineering team can reduce the management of the platform itself by improving the data plane part of the system to upload more management."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"The product’s cost could be reduced."
"There needs to be better documentation."
"Integration could be better. When you think about scanning, it's not used just with this product alone but with other Qualys products. If you think about the bundle, the product itself is good. But integration with other products and packages has space for improvement. They should also offer a better price for bundles."
"The only improvement I can think of is on the implementation side. At times it is a bit slow."
"The tool needs to improve the adding assets and report generation features. I would like to see the policy scan of offline appliances in the product's future releases."
"Some of the older features could be polished instead of focusing on releasing new features."
"There's a need to upgrade or fix the potential vulnerability rate. Around 20,000 potential vulnerabilities were showing in Qualys VMDR, but none of the other tools showed them. When we checked, it wasn't the case. Support explained that even small issues were being counted as vulnerabilities, causing issues in our audit. So, the security features could be improved to identify vulnerabilities accurately."
"We face issues while scanning multiple assets."
"Qualys VMDR is basically susceptible to false positives, and false negatives."
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 14th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Qualys VMDR is ranked 12th in Container Security with 77 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Qualys VMDR is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualys VMDR writes "Good visibility but expensive and needs better support". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher, Tenable.io Container Security and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, whereas Qualys VMDR is most compared with Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center, Rapid7 InsightVM, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and Tenable Vulnerability Management. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Qualys VMDR 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.