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 UI is responsive and user-friendly."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"The real-time detection and response capabilities overall are great."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"The multi-cloud support is valuable. They are expanding to different clouds. It is not restricted to only AWS. It allows us to have different clouds on one platform."
"It is scalable, stable, and can detect any threat on a machine. It uses artificial intelligence and can lock down any virus."
"PingSafe offers an intuitive user interface that lets us navigate quickly and easily."
"Aqua Security helps us to check the vulnerability of image assurance and check for malware."
"Valuable features include the ability to connect it to our Docker Hub where our images are stored, good integration with Slack, and the connection to the CV, to easily see which CVs are on each image."
"Support is very helpful."
"The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"It is a highly scalable solution since it is a service by AWS. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features are the single system for data collection and the alert mechanisms."
"The solution provides AWS GuardDuty S3 protection, EKS runtime protection, and malware protection."
"We have over 1,000 employees, and we monitor their activity through AWS GuardDuty."
"The product has automated protection powered by AI/ML, which is now far more powerful than before. It uses AI/ML in its detection algorithm, providing fast and quick results."
"Deployment is great, and we didn't face any big challenges."
"AWS GuardDuty helps by providing continuous threat detection and signaling potential threats. Its most valuable feature is continuous monitoring. The tool's integration with other AWS services has improved security. It provides continuous monitoring and intelligent threat detection, quickly signaling any issues. I would rate this improvement a seven out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"We've found a lot of false positives."
"The Kubernetes scanning on the Oracle Cloud needs to be improved. It's on the roadmap. AWS has this capability, but it's unavailable for Oracle Cloud."
"There is a bit of a learning curve for new users."
"Whenever I view the processes and the process aspect, it takes a long time to load."
"We are experiencing problems with Cloud Native Security reporting."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"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."
"I would like Aqua Security to look into is the development of a web security portal."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"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."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"There's room for improvement, particularly in management capabilities as it may not be comprehensive enough for all customers, and it has been lacking in the realm of cloud security posture management."
"Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request. What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?" We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud."
"I work in a bank, and it would be good if AWS GuardDuty could be integrated with other monitoring and detection tools we use."
"It is evolving, and at the moment, I will just need it on a larger scale. Then, it will satisfy my demand, initially."
"An improvement would be to have a mobile version where remote workers can log in and monitor and fix issues."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options."
"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."
"The solution has to be integrated with new services that AWS adds like QuickSight, Managed Airflow, AppFlow and MWAA."
"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.
