We performed a comparison between Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Trend Micro Deep Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."PingSafe's integration is smooth. They are highly customer-oriented, and the integration went well for us."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"It is fairly simple. Anybody can use it."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"PingSafe can integrate all your cloud accounts and resources you create in the AWS account, We have set it up to scan the AWS transfer services, EC2, security groups, and GitHub."
"Cloud Native Security is user-friendly. Everything in the Cloud Native Security tool is straightforward, including detections, integration, reporting, etc. They are constantly improving their UI by adding plugins and other features."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The technical support is good."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"The customer service/technical support for this solution is very fast."
"One of the most valuable features is that it's a firewall-based solution. We just open the required reports to the server—to server communication—and that's how we use Deep Security."
"Deep Security provides us with a lot of reassurance about security threats. You don't have to worry about a patch not being there in the software. You're confident that all the patches and vulnerabilities are taken care of."
"The solution has a low footprint and does not have a lot of impact on the host."
"The solution's endpoint protection is the most valuable feature."
"In terms of valuable features, I would say its intrusion prevention. Each and every IP connecting to the server gets scanned so we know everyone who is accessing our server and we can block whichever IP's do not belong to us at the firewall."
"In addition to providing our clients a view of what's happening in their data centers, it also does virtual patching in the data center. It enhances the security in the data center big time."
"There are compliance issues for legacy applications and after applying OS security patches. The product's HIPS (Host Intrusion Prevention System) modules do the job for you automatically, without any downtime."
"It took us a while to configure the software to work well in this type of environment, as the support documents were not always clear."
"When you find a vulnerability and resolve it, the same issue will not occur again. I want PingSafe to block the same vulnerability from appearing again. I want something like a playbook where the steps that we take to resolve an issue are repeated when that issue happens again."
"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."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"Sometimes the Storyline ID is a bit wacky."
"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The testing process could be improved."
"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 solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"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."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"We have had some issues when it drains some of the resources of the server."
"The product isn't very user-friendly."
"The problem with this solution is that if you go on large sites you have to have an external database, which would increase the cost."
"Trend Micro is not government certified or federal complaint. If they could become compliant/certified, this would make it easier for us to use it for our government projects."
"The working interface and the reports for non-technical people could use improvement. They are a bit scary."
"It would be better if they merge a few features into one product. For example, they have an encryption feature that is separately sold. If they could merge it with Apex One or any endpoint security solution, maybe it would also be good for the end user."
"Deep Security's reporting functionality could be improved."
"I would rate tech support in the range of six to eight out of 10. Time to provide solution could be improved."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 18th in Container Security with 10 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 1st in Virtualization Security with 81 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Deep Security writes "High availability, effective VPM, and responsive support". 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 Qualys VMDR, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Vision One Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security and Trellix Endpoint Security.
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.
