We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"PingSafe offers three key features: vulnerability management notifications, cloud configuration assistance, and security scanning."
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"Azure Kubernetes Service is pretty robust in terms of scalability and auto-scaling fixes."
"The advantage of AKS is somewhat greater than that of Kubernetes, such as those provided by Google Cloud or AWS. However, the unique benefit offered by Microsoft is its robust CI/CD capabilities, along with the Azure feature for building workflows. When you combine the entire ecosystem, AKS becomes an excellent choice, particularly for enterprise applications."
"The most valuable feature is the autoscaling and self-healing."
"The platform's high scalability is one of its biggest advantages."
"Its support team resolves technical issues accurately."
"The setup was straightforward and it took one hour to deploy."
"Has a good management feature monitored by the cloud service provider."
"We find the container orchestration tool that this solution provides to be very valuable."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"I want PingSafe to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, PingSafe is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If PingSafe had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"Their search feature could be better."
"Whenever I view the processes and the process aspect, it takes a long time to load."
"We are getting reports only in a predefined form. I would like to have customized reports so that I can see how many issues are open or closed today or in two weeks."
"We've found a lot of false positives."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"More control over Infra scanning can be introduced."
"Unfortunately, when a microservice fails, Azure can take up to 60 seconds to broadcast an alert to the monitoring agents."
"The solution should improve its UI and cost."
"This is a fairly expensive solution, which can make it prohibitive for smaller organizations."
"There are a lot of features that should be included with the AKS."
"I would like to see Azure implement something like the K9 terminal for interacting with Kubernetes clusters. It's a user-friendly CLI interface."
"It just loses out because you have less access to it programmatically, with less technical or customizable access."
"The product’s cost could be reduced."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with Red Hat OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher and Qualys VMDR, whereas Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Symantec Data Center Security. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes report.
See our list of best Container Security 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.