We performed a comparison between Aqua Security Platform AWS GuardDuty and based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Aqua Security Platform received positive comments about its container security and malware detection. Users praised AWS GuardDuty for its unified data collection and ability to analyze logs from multiple sources. Aqua Security Platform has room for improvement in automated report delivery and log forwarding. Users would say Aqua is resource heavy, and the user interface could be overhauled. AWS GuardDuty users asked for a mobile version to accommodate remote workers and more analytics in the dashboard.
Service and Support: Customers have generally had positive experiences with Aqua Security Platform customer service, finding them responsive and helpful. However, some customers complained that they were forced to resolve issues themselves. AWS GuardDuty customers have praised the excellent support provided by the Amazon team, citing quick response times. Some noted dissatisfaction with wait times for phone support.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Aqua Security Platform can be either simple or challenging, depending on the environment and user expertise. Some users could easily complete the setup with the help of documentation, but others encountered challenges. AWS GuardDuty's setup was generally considered to be effortless and uncomplicated.
Pricing: Aqua Security Platform is considered to be moderately priced relative to other solutions. AWS GuardDuty has a competitive pay-go pricing model. The cost of AWS GuardDuty is determined by the amount of data processed.
ROI: Aqua Security Platform delivers value by relying on information from trusted sources or direct communication with Aqua Security. AWS GuardDuty boosts security and overall customer trust, potentially opening doors for new business prospects.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer AWS GuardDuty over the Aqua Security Platform. Users like AWS GuardDuty's straightforward setup, whereas some consider Aqua Security Platform to be tricky to deploy. AWS GuardDuty stands out for its ability to provide a single system for data collection and alert mechanisms. Users find its pay-go price model to be flexible and competitive.
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"I did a lot of research before signing up and doing the demo. They have a good reputation as far as catching threats early on."
"PingSafe's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"There's real-time threat detection. It can show threats and find issues based on their severity and helps us with real-time monitoring."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"Customers find it invaluable to have the ability to check for vulnerabilities in an image before deployment, similar to a sandbox environment."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"What we found most valuable in Amazon GuardDuty is its threat detection feature, especially because we were monitoring a huge number of AWS accounts, so we needed a solution that would monitor for any kind of malicious activity. The monitoring aspect of the solution was great because it gave us timely notifications if and when anything happened, and Amazon GuardDuty helped keep us on our toes to make sure we took action right away."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports."
"We have over 1,000 employees, and we monitor their activity through AWS GuardDuty."
"With anomaly detection, active threat monitoring, and set correlation, GuardDuty alerts me to any unusual user behavior or traffic patterns right away, which is great for staying on top of potential security risks."
"Since our environment is cloud based and accessible from the internet, we like the ability to check where the user has logged in from and what kind of API calls that user is doing."
"The out-of-band malware detection from the EBS volumes. It's really cool. No agents or anything needed, it automatically finds and correlates based on malware."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"There is room for improvement in the current active licensing model for PingSafe."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"When we get a new finding from PingSafe, I wish we could get an alert in the console, so we can work on it before we see it in the report. It would be very useful for the team that is actively working on the PingSafe platform, so we can close the issue the same day before it appears in the daily report."
"The integration with Oracle has room for improvement."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"The resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"I would like Aqua Security to look into is the development of a web security portal."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"The user interface could be improved, especially in terms of organization and clarity."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"Some of the pain points in Amazon GuardDuty was the cost. When compared to some of the other services, depending on how many we had to monitor, if we had a huge range of accounts, as our accounts increased, we had a cost factor that came into play. Sometimes there were issues, for example, with findings that came up, we wanted to add notes and there were issues back then where notes couldn't be entered properly. If we wanted to leave a note such as "Okay, we have assessed this and this is how we feel", or "This is a false positive", Amazon GuardDuty wasn't allowing us to do that. Even with the suppression of certain findings, there was some issue that we had faced at one time. Those were some of the pain points of the solution."
"One improvement I would suggest for AWS GuardDuty is the ability to assign findings to specific users or groups, facilitating better communication and follow-up actions."
"We currently find Lacework to be much better at detecting vulnerabilities than AWS GuardDuty. The engines of AWS GuardDuty have to be improved."
"Cost changes. It's very expensive. If you turn on every feature, it's more than most commercial vendors. For smaller orgs, that doesn't make sense."
"Because it's a threat detection service, they need to keep up with the various threat factors because new threat factors and attack factors come up all the time."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
"The product needs to improve its cost-efficiency since it is expensive."
"While sending the alerts to the email, they are not being patched. we have to do the patching and mapping manually. If GuardDuty could include a feature to do this automatically, it will make our job easier. That is something I believe can be improved."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 11th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 16 reviews while AWS GuardDuty is ranked 4th in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) with 20 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while AWS GuardDuty is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "Reliable with good container scanning and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS GuardDuty writes "A stellar threat-detection service that has helped bolster security against malicious threats". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Snyk, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and SUSE NeuVector, whereas AWS GuardDuty is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, Wiz and Illumio. See our AWS GuardDuty vs. Aqua Cloud Security Platform report.
See our list of best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) 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.