We performed a comparison between SUSE NeuVector and Microsoft Defender for Cloud based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer SUSE NeuVector over Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Reviewers liked its extensive features, user-friendly interface, and support for multiple clusters. It also stands out for its integration with CI/CD pipelines and ability to perform ISO certification checks, making it valuable for compliance purposes. While Microsoft Defender for Cloud earned high marks for threat analysis, automation, and integration with other Microsoft products, SUSE NeuVector's compliance features give it a competitive advantage.
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the vulnerability assessments and the glossary of compliance."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the insights, meaning the remediation suggestions, as well as the incident alerts."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce."
"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."
"The vulnerability reporting is helpful. When we initially deployed Defender, it reported many more threats than we currently see. It gave us insight into areas we had not previously considered, so we knew where we needed to act."
"We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"It needs to be simplified and made more user-friendly for a non-technical person."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"Another thing that could be improved was that they could recommend processes on how to react to alerts, or recommend best practices based on how other organizations do things if they receive an alert about XYZ."
"The solution could extend its capabilities to other cloud providers. Right now, if you want to monitor a virtual machine on another cloud, you can do that. However, this cannot be done with other cloud platform services. I hope once that is available then Defender for Cloud will be a unified solution for all cloud platform services."
"The most significant areas for improvement are in the security of our identity and endpoints and the posture of the cloud environment. Better protection for our cloud users and cloud apps is always welcome."
"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."
"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."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Container Security with 46 reviews while SUSE NeuVector is ranked 19th in Container Security with 7 reviews. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0, while SUSE NeuVector is rated 7.8. 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 SUSE NeuVector writes "Good value for money; great for policy management". 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 SUSE NeuVector is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Sysdig Falco and NGINX App Protect. See our Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. SUSE NeuVector report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors and best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.