We performed a comparison between Google Cloud Security Command Center and Microsoft Defender for Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."They're responsive to feature requests. If I suggest a feature for Prisma, I will need to wait until the next release on their roadmap. Cloud Native Security will add it right away."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"It saves time, makes your environment more secure, and improves compliance. PingSafe helps with audits, ensuring that you are following best practices for cloud security. You don't need to be an expert to use it and improve your security."
"The mean time to detect has been reduced."
"Our previous product took a lot of man hours to manage. Once we got Singularity Cloud Workload Security, it freed up our time to work on other tasks."
"It is advantageous in terms of time-saving and cost reduction."
"The solution is a good alerting tool."
"It simplifies compliance efforts."
"The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies."
"Defender is user-friendly and provides decent visibility into threats."
"We saw improvement from a regulatory compliance perspective due to having a single dashboard."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce."
"The solution is very easy to deploy."
"Provides a very good view of the entire security setup of your organization."
"Defender is a robust platform for dealing with many kinds of threats. We're protected from various threats, like viruses. Attacks can be easily minimized with this solution defending our infrastructure."
"The product has given us more insight into potential avenues for attack paths."
"The main feature is the security posture assessment through the security score. I find that to be very helpful because it gives us guidance on what needs to be secured and recommendations on how to secure the workloads that have been onboarded."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"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."
"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."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"The integration with Oracle has room for improvement."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"Visibility can be improved along with automation."
"Defender is occasionally unreliable. It isn't 100% efficient in terms of antivirus detection, but it isn't an issue most of the time. It's also somewhat difficult to train new security analysts to use Defender."
"From my own perspective, they just need a product that is tailored to micro-segmentation so I can configure rules for multiple systems at once and manage it."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"Customizing some of the compliance requirements based on individual needs seems like the biggest area of improvement. There should be an option to turn specific controls on and off based on how your solution is configured."
"As an analyst, there is no way to configure or create a playbook to automate the process of flagging suspicious domains."
"The initial setup is not actually so complex but it feels complex because there are many add-ons. There are many options and my team needs to be aware of all of these changes happening on the backend which is a distraction."
"It needs to be simplified and made more user-friendly for a non-technical person."
"The most significant areas for improvement are in the security of our identity and endpoints and the posture of the cloud environment. Better protection for our cloud users and cloud apps is always welcome."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Google Cloud Security Command Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Google Cloud Security Command Center is ranked 17th in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 2 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is ranked 3rd in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) with 46 reviews. Google Cloud Security Command Center is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Defender for Cloud is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Google Cloud Security Command Center writes "Provides visibility, address cloud misconfiguration and prevent threats ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Cloud writes "Provides multi-cloud capability, is plug-and-play, and improves our security posture". Google Cloud Security Command Center is most compared with Wiz and Orca Security, whereas Microsoft Defender for Cloud is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft Defender XDR, Wiz and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. See our Google Cloud Security Command Center vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud report.
See our list of best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.