We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud and Data Center Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"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."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"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."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to gain deep visibility into the workloads inside containers."
"With PingSafe, it's easy to onboard new accounts."
"The management console is the most valuable feature."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"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."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"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."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"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."
"One area for improvement could be the internal analysis process, specifically the guidance provided for remediation."
"In some cases, the rules are strictly enforced but do not align with real-world use cases."
"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"PingSafe takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"PingSafe is an excellent CSPM tool, but the CWPP features need to improve, and there is a scope for more application security posture management features. There aren't many ASPM solutions on the market, and existing ones are costly. I would like to see PingSafe develop into a single pane of glass for ASPM, CSPM, and CWPP. Another feature I'd like to see is runtime protection."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 3rd in Cloud and Data Center Security with 17 reviews while SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is ranked 7th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 67 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is rated 8.6. 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 SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security writes "Provides excellent workload telemetry, hunting capabilities, and deep visibility ". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Orca Security, AWS GuardDuty and Sysdig Secure. See our Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors and best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center 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.
