Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Verodin comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Verodin based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Cymulate, Picus Security and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS).
To learn more, read our detailed Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources.""The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility.""The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events.""The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections.""The tool is a complete package that offers many features like visibility. You can get a graph with real-time workflows and visibility into server-to-server communication. We get visibility into many things happening within our environment.""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.""From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful.""Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."

More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pros →

"The solution is constantly updating. Their data and security validation are cutting-edge."

More Verodin Pros →

Cons
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it.""Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have.""The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow.""They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware.""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.""Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult.""Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error.""It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."

More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Cons →

"The integration engine needs to improve."

More Verodin Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
  • "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."
  • "The customer would complain about the cost."
  • "The solution is reasonably priced and I would rate it a six out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
  • "The price is the same as other products in the market. There's no price argument to choose one or the other product, it will cost the customer approximately the same."
  • "Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is expensive."
  • More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems.
    Top Answer:The pricing is too high. Based on market standards, I'd recommend lowering the price. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, with ten being affordable. The DQE feature increases the license cost… more »
    Top Answer:Customers would want to see the cost improved.
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    314
    Comparisons
    186
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    442
    Rating
    7.5
    Views
    1,066
    Comparisons
    524
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Guardicore Centra, GuardiCore
    Learn More
    Akamai
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is a software-based microsegmentation solution that provides the simplest, fastest, and most intuitive way to enforce Zero Trust principles. It enables you to prevent malicious lateral movement in your network through precise segmentation policies, visuals of activity within your IT environment, and network security alerts. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation works across your data centers, multicloud environments, and endpoints. It is faster to deploy than infrastructure segmentation approaches and provides you with unparalleled visibility and control of your network.

    Equipped with FireEye frontline intelligence, the Verodin platform will measure and test security environments against both known and newly discovered threats, empowering organizations to identify risks in their security controls before a breach occurs, and rapidly adapt their defenses to the evolving threat landscape.

    Sample Customers
    Santander, Frontier Airlines, OpenLink, Intermountain Healthcare, Cellcom, BancoBASE
    AAFCU, Amuse, Axway, Bank Gutmann, Bank of Thailand, BCC Corporation, Blackboat, CapWealth Advisors, CBC, CERN, Lagardère, Land Bank of the Philippines, laya healthcare, Lindsay Automotive Group
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    University20%
    Retailer10%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Educational Organization10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Government5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm26%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise53%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise73%
    Buyer's Guide
    Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Cymulate, Picus Security and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 4th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 17 reviews while Verodin is ranked 10th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Verodin is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Verodin writes "Stable with good updates but needs a better integration engine". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Verodin is most compared with Picus Security, AttackIQ, Cymulate, Pentera and SafeBreach.

    See our list of best Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) vendors.

    We monitor all Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) 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.