We performed a comparison between Snyk and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Snyk is praised for its developer-friendly approach, seamless integration, compatibility with containers, and partnership with Docker. CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is renowned for following security best practices. Users like its lightweight cloud-integrated agent integrated and its ability to leverage AI for endpoint protection. Snyk could enhance its compatibility and expand its vulnerability database. CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security's user interface could use an update.
Service and Support: Snyk support has received positive feedback about the helpfulness and responsiveness of their team, but others want Snyk to manage support requests better. Customers of CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security are mostly satisfied with their customer service.
Ease of Deployment: Users generally find the initial setup for Snyk to be simple and smooth, with excellent assistance from the Snyk team. The initial setup for CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is also manageable, but a few users required support during deployment and faced difficulties with Kubernetes implementation.
Pricing: Snyk has considered more expensive than other solutions, while CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is regarded as reasonably priced. However, the cloud option for CrowdStrike can be more costly than many on-premises alternatives.
ROI: Snyk provides a budget-friendly option for finding open-source vulnerabilities, which may offset the yearly subscription costs. CrowdStrike's return on investment is not fixed and relies heavily on such factors as the industry and implementation approach.
Comparison Results: Snyk is generally preferred over CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security. Users appreciate Snyk's ease of setup, developer-friendly nature, and robust feature set. Snyk's compatibility with containers and partnership with Docker make it a popular choice for developers. CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security could improve its user interface and pricing to become more competitive.
"I like CSPM the most. It captures a lot of alerts within a short period of time. When an alert gets triggered on the cloud, it throws an alert within half an hour, which is very reasonable. It is a plus point for us."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"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."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"Cloud Native Security helps us discover vulnerabilities in a cloud environment like open ports that allow people to attack our environment. If someone unintentionally opens a port, we are exposed. Cloud Native Security alerts us so we can remediate the problem. We can also automate it so that Cloud Native Security will fix it."
"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."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"There is a lot that it can do, but endpoint protection is the main thing about it. The fact that it uses machine learning and artificial intelligence to monitor and remediate the issues in real-time is probably the bread and butter of the product."
"The initial setup is easy ."
"The most valuable feature of Falcon Cloud Security is its comprehensive threat-hunting ability."
"The immediate mitigation of potential threats and instant alerts are valuable."
"It's easy to gather insights and conduct analysis about existing threats."
"Technical support is helpful."
"CrowdStrike utilizes signatureless technology, eliminating the need for regular signature updates on endpoint systems."
"It is fully cloud-based, so we don't need to invest in third-party agents repeatedly."
"The dependency checks of the libraries are very valuable, but the licensing part is also very important because, with open source components, licensing can be all over the place. Our project is not an open source project, but we do use quite a lot of open source components and we want to make sure that we don't have surprises in there."
"Snyk has given us really good results because it is fully automated. We don't have to scan projects every time to find vulnerabilities, as it already stores the dependencies that we are using. It monitors 24/7 to find out if there are any issues that have been reported out on the Internet."
"I find SCA to be valuable. It can read your libraries, your license and bring the best way to resolve your problem in the best scenario."
"From the software composition analysis perspective, it first makes sure that we understand what is happening from a third-party perspective for the particular product that we use. This is very difficult when you are building software and incorporating dependencies from other libraries, because those dependencies have dependencies and that chain of dependencies can go pretty deep. There could be a vulnerability in something that is seven layers deep, and it would be very difficult to understand that is even affecting us. Therefore, Snyk provides fantastic visibility to know, "Yes, we have a problem. Here is where it ultimately comes from." It may not be with what we're incorporating, but something much deeper than that."
"The most valuable feature is that they add a lot of their own information to the vulnerabilities. They describe vulnerabilities and suggest their own mitigations or version upgrades. The information was the winning factor when we compared Snyk to others. This is what gave it more impact."
"The most valuable feature of Snyk is the SBOM."
"It is one of the best product out there to help developers find and fix vulnerabilities quickly. When we talk about the third-party software vulnerability piece and potentially security issues, it takes the load off the user or developer. They even provide automitigation strategies and an auto-fix feature, which seem to have been adopted pretty well."
"A main feature of Snyk is that when you go with SCA, you do get properly done security composition, also from the licensing and open-source parameters perspective. A lot of companies often use open-source libraries or frameworks in their code, which is a big security concern. Snyk deals with all the things and provides you with a proper report about whether any open-source code or framework that you are using is vulnerable. In that way, Snyk is very good as compared to other tools."
"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."
"While it is good, I think the solution's console could be improved."
"In addition to our telecom and Slack channels, it would be helpful to receive Cloud Native Security security notifications in Microsoft Teams."
"We had a glitch in PingSafe where it fed us false positives in the past."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"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."
"Cloud Native Security's reporting could be better. We are unable to see which images are impacted. Several thousand images have been deployed, so if we can see some application-specific information in the dashboard, we can directly send that report to the team that owns the application. We'd also like the option to download the report from the portal instead of waiting for the report to be sent to our email."
"The UI part needs to be improved."
"There should be cloud storage scanning. We would like to have cloud storage vulnerability and threat management on any cloud storage."
"Incorporating threat intelligence into the system would be a valuable addition."
"Different file options should be available, and clients should be able to select from the options."
"One area for improvement in Falcon Cloud Security is the support portal."
"The threat intelligence and user behavioral analysis could be more comprehensive."
"The only challenge lies in token verification."
"The log scale or Humio side of it where it collects the data and expands into the XDR world still needs time to develop in terms of the way it combines the data and metadata that flows into the platform. I know they're working on it."
"I think Snyk should add more of a vulnerability protection feature in the tool since it is an area where it lacks."
"They were a couple of issues which happened because Snyk lacked some documentation on the integration side. Snyk is lacking a lot of documentation, and I would like to see them improve this. This is where we struggle a bit. For example, if something breaks, we can't figure out how to fix that issue. It may be a very simple thing, but because we don't have the proper documentation around an issue, it takes us a bit longer."
"We have seen cases where tools didn't find or recognize certain dependencies. These are known issues, to some extent, due to the complexity in the language or stack that you using. There are some certain circumstances where the tool isn't actually finding what it's supposed to be finding, then it could be misleading."
"The tool's initial use is complex."
"The reporting mechanism of Snyk could improve. The reporting mechanism is available only on the higher level of license. Adjusting the policy of the current setup of recording this report is something that can improve. For instance, if you have a certain license, you receive a rating, and the rating of this license remains the same for any use case. No matter if you are using it internally or using it externally, you cannot make the adjustment to your use case. It will always alert as a risky license. The areas of licenses in the reporting and adjustments can be improve"
"Generating reports and visibility through reports are definitely things they can do better."
"The feature for automatic fixing of security breaches could be improved."
"We use Bamboo for CI.CD, and we had problems integrating Snyk with it. Ultimately, we got the two solutions to work together, but it was difficult."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is ranked 9th in Container Security with 13 reviews while Snyk is ranked 5th in Container Security with 41 reviews. CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is rated 8.8, while Snyk is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security writes "Enhances the overall safety of our company's environment from cyber threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Wiz, Qualys VMDR and AWS Security Hub, whereas Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, GitHub Advanced Security, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and Veracode. See our CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security vs. Snyk 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.
