Anonymous UserSenior Architect at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."
"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive. It's very intuitive."
"The dashboard is very good. It gives our clients a lot of information and allows them to have a complete overview of the system. Everything is visible in one glance."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce."
"It takes very little effort to integrate it. It also gives very good visibility into what exactly is happening."
"The technical support is very good."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"Good compliance policies."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"No possibility to write or edit any capability."
"When you work with it, the only problem that we're struggling with is that we have 21 different subscriptions we're trying to apply security to. It's impossible to keep everything organized."
"The solution is quite complex. A lot of the different policies that actually get applied don't pertain to every client. If you need to have something open for a client application to work, then you get dinged for having a port open or having an older version of TLS available."
"Pricing could be improved. There are limited options based on pricing for the government."
"From a compliance standpoint, they can include some more metrics and some specific compliances such as GDPR."
"It needs to be simplified and made more user-friendly for a non-technical person."
"The initial setup is not actually so complex but it feels complex because there are many add-ons. There are many options and my team needs to be aware of all of these changes happening on the backend which is a distraction."
"The documentation and implementation guides could be improved."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"I'm not privy to that information, but I know it's probably close to a million dollars a year."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
"This is a worldwide service and depending on the country, there will be different prices."
"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
"Its pricing is a little bit high in terms of Azure Security Center, but the good thing is that we don't need to maintain and deploy it. So, while the pricing is high, it is native to Azure which is why we prefer using this tool."
"I am not involved in this area. However, I believe its price is okay because even small customers are using Azure Security Center. I don't think it is very expensive."
"The cost of the license is based on the subscriptions that you have."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"Guardicore Centra provides better value for money than NSX, was the other solution that we looked at, which was too expensive for what it does."
"This is not a cheap solution but you have to consider the bigger picture, which is what it is giving you."
Azure Security Center protects your Azure and hybrid resources. Microsoft uses a wide variety of physical, infrastructure, and operational controls to help secure Azure—but there are additional actions you need to take to help safeguard your workloads. Turn on Azure Security Center to strengthen your cloud security posture. Within Azure Security Center, use Azure Defender to protect your hybrid cloud workloads. With Azure Security Center, you can:
- Assess and visualize the security state of your resources in Azure, on-premises, and in other clouds with Azure Secure Score
- Simplify enterprise compliance and view your compliance against regulatory requirements
- Protect all your hybrid cloud workloads with Azure Defender, which is integrated with Security Center
- Use AI and automation to cut through false alarms, quickly identify threats, and streamline threat investigation
To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Azure Security Center Community.
Guardicore Centra is a comprehensive data center and cloud security solution that delivers the simplest way to apply micro-segmentation controls to reduce the attack surface and detect and control breaches within east-west traffic. It provides deep visibility into application dependencies and enforces network and process-level policies to protect critical applications.
Azure Security Center is ranked 3rd in Cloud Workload Security with 17 reviews while Guardicore Centra is ranked 5th in Cloud Workload Security with 8 reviews. Azure Security Center is rated 8.0, while Guardicore Centra is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Azure Security Center writes "Provides us with recommendations for improving security and enables benchmarking of infrastructure for compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Guardicore Centra writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". Azure Security Center is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Amazon GuardDuty, Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Azure Defender and Illumio Adaptive Security Platform, whereas Guardicore Centra is most compared with Cisco Secure Workload, Illumio Adaptive Security Platform, VMware NSX, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Skybox Security Suite. See our Azure Security Center vs. Guardicore Centra report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Security vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload 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.