Orca Security Reviews

I have used Orca Security for continuous cloud assessment visibility, identifying and prioritizing vulnerabilities and misconfigurations. I also monitor compliance against frameworks, whether it's NIST or SOC 2. Additionally, I use it for detecting cloud security risk and supporting incident response because it provides context around affected cloud resources.

Risk detection in Orca Security is strong, mainly because it provides agentless visibility across the cloud environments I work in. My job involves identifying vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, identifying risk or exposed assets, and Orca Security does a great job helping to prioritize those risks on their potential business impact. It helps me align very well with the type of risk and the type of work I do in an AWS environment.

I have used Orca Security's Cloud Cost Optimization feature in one of my recent projects to help identify underutilized cloud resources or cloud resources that have been idle for a long time. That feature allows me to identify those resources. My main focus is security, but I find it useful because if I'm able to see those resources that are not being used, I can adjust them. If I have to reduce their size, depending on what the case might be, or if I have to get it decommissioned, I can do so to help reduce unnecessary cloud spending while maintaining a secure environment. As much as my part of the job is security, I think overall, making sure that we are not just spending money on resources that we're not taking full advantage of is definitely a role that I would have to play. It also helps support conversations with the infrastructure team about balancing cost, performance, and security, to be able to get more data to have those conversations with those teams.

Regarding the Cloud to Dev feature, I personally have not used that. However, I do know about it. Orca Security has the capability to help developers identify and remediate security issues early in software development life cycles by connecting cloud risk back to the code, repositories, or development responsibility. Although I have not used it personally, I have had a conversation with the software team where it helps to bridge the gap between security and development by mapping cloud security findings back to relative code repositories and development teams. It makes it easier to identify root causes and prioritize remediation early in the development cycle, which helps with collaboration between engineers and the security team.

Orca Security has helped significantly to reduce the time it took to identify or prioritize cloud security alerts because of the way it provides a centralized view of risk and correlated findings across the cloud environment. Instead of manually investigating every alert, I am able to focus on high-risk issues first based on factors such as exposure, exploitability, or business impact. This definitely significantly improves response time and makes the remediation process more efficient. Taking that manual factor out of it overall reduces the time for everything.

Orca Security has been very helpful in preventing risks and attacks across my application life cycle by providing continuous visibility into the cloud workload. This also allows my team to prioritize and remediate issues before they could be exploited in production. It has also helped strengthen collaborations between security and development teams by providing actionable findings, which reduce the overall attack surface and improve security posture.

The features of Orca Security that stand out to me from my experience are that it allows agentless deployments. Since it is integrated into my AWS environment, it gives me comprehensive visibility across my whole AWS environment. With that kind of visibility, I am able to detect vulnerabilities or misconfigurations. I can do risk prioritizations and compliance monitoring through that. These capabilities of Orca Security align closely with the work I do when it comes to vulnerability management or security, cloud security assessments, or even regulatory compliance. Those features help with my day-to-day activities.

Orca Security goes beyond just basic vulnerability detection when analyzing risks contextually and holistically. I think it adds a strong contextual understanding. Instead of treating each finding in isolation, it correlates risk across cloud assets, identities, network exposures, or workload configurations. That really helps provide a more holistic view of the attack path and potential business impact.

From my perspective, Orca Security is a really good tool. I would say one area I would like to see CNAPP platforms get is more intelligence when it comes to risk prioritization, which correlates with vulnerability, exposing assets, identities, and active threats to help the security team focus on risks that are more likely to be exploited. I am a huge advocate for automation. I also think deeper automation for remediation or stronger integration with ticketing and CI/CD pipelines or more customization would help. Executive reporting would help the security team respond significantly faster and communicate risk more effectively if those kinds of improvements are made.

I have relatively hands-on experience with Orca Security for about three to four years. I have worked more hands-on with cloud security projects, and some of them are integrated with Orca Security.

I think the state of stability with Orca Security is impressive. It generally provides strong availability and scalability compared to a traditional on-premises security tool. I think the agentless part of it and the fact that it integrates directly with a cloud provider such as AWS helps to reduce operational overhead and potential points of failure that come with managing agents across multiple systems. From what I have seen, the architecture can support consistent visibility and create a very good, reliable risk detection across environments, even as a cloud workload scales.

Before Orca Security, I used different solutions for the same use cases because of my expertise in those areas. I have used Amazon Web Services Security Hub, IAM, native logging and monitoring tools, Nessus, and a lot of SIEM platforms such as Splunk or QRadar. Overall, those tools together helped with vulnerability detection. They also helped with incident response or compliance monitoring and security alert triage. However, when it comes to more correlated data across multiple systems, Orca Security streamlines that by centralizing and correlating the risk all in one place.

With my previous agent-based solutions, I have encountered performance issues when identifying risks. The challenges came more with the scalability of risk analysis across the multiple tools. Each solution provided a valuable insight on its own. For example, Nessus for vulnerability scanning and Splunk or QRadar for log analysis. However, the main limitation was that the findings were often siloed because they are different platforms. That meant I had to do the manual correlation of the data across the different platforms to understand the full context of the risk, which could slow down triage or investigation overall, especially if I was working with a larger environment with higher volume alerts.

Before Orca Security, I used different solutions for the same use cases because of my expertise in those areas. I have used Amazon Web Services Security Hub, IAM, native logging and monitoring tools, Nessus, and a lot of SIEM platforms such as Splunk or QRadar. Overall, those tools together helped with vulnerability detection. They also helped with incident response or compliance monitoring and security alert triage. However, when it comes to more correlated data across multiple systems, Orca Security streamlines that by centralizing and correlating the risk all in one place.

With my previous agent-based solutions, I have encountered performance issues when identifying risks. The challenges came more with the scalability of risk analysis across the multiple tools. Each solution provided a valuable insight on its own. For example, Nessus for vulnerability scanning and Splunk or QRadar for log analysis. However, the main limitation was that the findings were often siloed because they are different platforms. That meant I had to do the manual correlation of the data across the different platforms to understand the full context of the risk, which could slow down triage or investigation overall, especially if I was working with a larger environment with higher volume alerts.

I did not participate in the initial setup and installation process of Orca Security personally. When I joined the team, it was already set up. I was not directly involved in the initial installation or setup. However, in my previous role, I did support some onboarding of other tools. I have a good understanding of how certain platforms are implemented or operationalized in an enterprise environment, but I did not set up Orca Security that I work with now.

This is somewhat out of my scope because I do not see the exact pricing structure of Orca Security. However, from what I know through research, I think it is good. I think it is fair pricing in my opinion. I have that in place of multiple tools. Orca Security kind of replaces multiple tools that help improve efficiency. So when it comes down to it, if it is cost-effective in terms of overall security operation, I think the price point is reasonable. However, I do not know the exact amount or the exact pricing.

That personally would not be a decision I made before choosing Orca Security. However, I have been collaborating with a bunch of other people in my team, and I think they have considered other options. Depending on what the environment is being used for and the use case in general, they like to look for something that will mix with cloud-native tools. Any third-party solution, whether it is Prism Cloud or Wiz, is something that I have heard of. However, the decision usually comes down to factors such as coverage across the multi-cloud environment or how easily it is to deploy or signal-to-noise ratio. Many factors come in before selecting what CNAPP they want to get. I feel that across everything, Orca Security stands out. The main thing that many people appreciate is the agentless visibility and the contextual risk prioritization, which is a good benefit that it has over competitors.

Regarding Orca Sensor, I personally have not used it, but I do know of it. I have not used it directly, but my experience has been more about how it collaborates with the AWS environment, which is my strong field. However, I know it has been useful when deploying sensors and agents. I do not know how in-depth that goes because I have never done that personally, but I still feel that overall, it does what it needs to do. It still provides visibility into workloads and vulnerabilities, whether it is misconfigurations or exposed assets, in whatever environment they are running it in.

I have used the official documentation offered by Orca Security a few times. I have used the documentation and guidelines in the context of IAM management workflows, particularly around single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, and user provisioning. The documentation from Orca Security is structured really properly. It got all the points across really great. It made it easy for me to read and understand. It was very straightforward. I was able to understand what was put across in the documentation without having to do multiple research or over-explanation. I appreciate that.

I would rate this review as an eight out of ten.

In my previous company, I used Orca Security as a CSPM tool, which stands for Cloud Security Posture Management. The tool is very nice, and with it, we achieved a lot of our remediation activities. Orca Security looks good in terms of Kubernetes and in terms of telling us about cloud misconfigurations and many other things.

I used Orca Security for approximately one and a half years, or roughly 11 to 12 months. Orca Security proved to be a good tool in my previous company.

I did not use the Cloud to Dev feature because it was recently rolled out at that time. At that point, we were moving to secure code and code review processes.

We did not use Orca Security sensor because we installed Orca Security API integration with our Azure Entra ID, in which all devices on our cloud infrastructure were scanned every 24 hours. However, after I left, the team considered using sensors because they have some limitations, particularly on legacy devices.

The standout part of Orca Security is the package approach. When they provide remediation or alerts, they also provide the exact path for a particular vulnerability or alert. They show us the specific path that needs to be fixed in order to remove the vulnerability or alert. They provide path information directly from the systems, so sometimes we don't need to log in directly and investigate ourselves. This feature is valuable, though there are occasional false positives, which is a normal part of security.

Regarding prioritization and assigning risk, Orca Security was good at analyzing risks contextually and holistically. As the tool and product mature, they will definitely announce new features. On a scale of ten, I would rate this around seven or eight. I have not given a ten because there are a few false positives and some areas where the product needs improvement on a regular basis. Sometimes they release the product, but modifications could still be required on their side.

It is good to prioritize risks with Orca Security because they are not only targeting the CVSS score but also the EPSS, which is the Exploit Prediction Scoring System. They monitor particular assets based on both approaches. On the CVSS side, they reference the National Vulnerability Database, and on the EPSS side, they target the Exploit Prediction Scoring System. So they are targeting both risk-based approaches as well as the CVSS approach.

Since I have not used Orca Security for 10 months, I am uncertain what areas still need improvement, as they may have rolled out features that addressed issues I faced in the past. However, I can say the tool is good. A few things could potentially be improved, particularly regarding false positives and the UI. What I observed is that they release updates to the platform without notifying the customer. Every time the UI is upgraded, they release something without notification. This could be a slight improvement. If they released some kind of notification to just inform the customer about UI changes, the customer would be aware of the changes that Orca Security is making in the backend.

Regarding stability, I would rate Orca Security an eight.

In terms of scalability, I would rate it an eight because it performed well with what I worked with at that point in time.

I would rate the technical support of Orca Security as eight. The customer success manager was also very helpful in terms of resolving issues.

Positive

I am currently using Wiz as well, and Wiz is also good. I think both Orca Security and Wiz are comparable and can work hand-in-hand. I would not say one is better than the other. I have started using Wiz and I like it because they also do similar things. I am yet to explore more on the Wiz side of things, but both are comparable and good.

Orca Security is deployed in the cloud.

I can say Orca Security roughly reduced the operating expenses by around 20-50%.

Orca Security was cheap.

Regarding the extent to which Orca Security helps in preventing risks and attacks across application lifecycles, I think it is the same scenario because there are many CSPM tools available. We have Wiz, Orca Security, and Lacework. All CSPM tools do the same work by scanning the infrastructure and providing reports either through API or through sensors. Definitely, the risk is more important on the cloud misconfiguration side because they tell us about the misconfigurations. CSPM is not a vulnerability management tool. It is more on the cloud side where they provide misconfigurations related to that. After you have deployed something on your infrastructure or cloud infrastructure, once you put a CSPM in your infrastructure, it will tell you how effectively you can remove those misconfigurations. That is the edge that CSPM is giving.

I would recommend Orca Security to other users because it was good at the point in time I used the product.

Regarding how Orca Security has helped reduce the time it takes to address cloud security alerts, this is a complex scenario because it is totally dependent on the situation of the alert. I cannot say it takes one or two minutes because it depends on how critical the alert is and how critical it is in our environment. Some of the time, based on our infrastructure, we have to keep things as exceptions. We cannot fix all things. But many times we got the right alert and fixed it by checking and updating the risk provided by Orca Security in my previous organization.

We used the cloud cost optimization feature and it was very effective. We used it alongside Microsoft Azure where we had a specific subscription for cloud cost optimization. They provided better features showing us which features we were not utilizing much and could turn off, or which features we were utilizing more so we could adjust the bandwidth level. For every feature there is a cost associated with it. In that way, we used it effectively.

Orca Security saves resources because it provides the actual output on the screen with the package path. The resources aspect is definitely valuable because of how it uses Linux and goes deep down into the assets. It provides that particular information directly on the portal itself.

Orca Security was used by approximately 50 to 100 users. I believe Orca Security was purchased through the AWS Marketplace.

I rate Orca Security an overall eight out of ten.

I use Orca Security to deploy in cloud infrastructures as a top-notch agentless SIEM and agentless cloud security platform. My use cases include cloud security, posture management, and detecting configuration misconfigurations across cloud environments. In AWS, which I use mostly for my work, it scans open S3 buckets, open ports, open IPs, and any open ports that are likely to be attacked or used as vulnerabilities. It also performs vulnerability management scans by running on VMs for CVEs, scanning containers, and providing serverless agents. It checks for outdated packages and OS level vulnerabilities without installing any agents. Having worked with other security platforms that have agents, I can confirm that one of Orca Security's main features is its agentless architecture.

Another significant use case is attack path analysis, which shows how an attacker could chain misconfigurations and vulnerabilities to reach the crown jewel of the environment. This is one of Orca Security's standout features. It visualizes the blast radius, demonstrating what the impact of a vulnerability would be. If an attacker exploits a vulnerability, it shows what may happen and what an attacker could do with all the vulnerabilities and misconfigurations combined.

Another feature is identity and risk access risk, which is CIEM that flags excessive permissions, unused roles, and privilege escalation paths within an IAM. Coming to container and Kubernetes security scans, it scans container images and Kubernetes clusters configurations for risk both before and after the deployment of those clusters. It has many other features as well. When we integrate it with CI/CD integration, it integrates with pipelines to catch Infrastructure as Code misconfigurations from Terraform or CloudFormation before deployment.

One of Orca Security's main features is its agentless architecture, enabling it to conduct cloud security gap analysis and vulnerability scans without installing agents. The tool offers visibility into attack paths and predicts potential impacts if an exploit occurs. Furthermore, it includes identity and risk access analysis, CIEM, and Kubernetes cluster scanning. The product integrates well with CI/CD pipelines for identifying IaC misconfigurations. I appreciate its side scanning and workload visibility, which is valuable for analysts involved in security posture management and audit evidence collection.

The difference between agentless and agent solutions is that while agentless provides great visibility, it does not offer real-time blocking. Orca Security could improve in this area by combining agentless features with real-time blocking capabilities.

They could add automation to automatically fix detected vulnerabilities and improve real-time runtime protection. More specifically, Orca Security could enhance lateral movement detection.

Orca Sensor, while important for detailed scanning and detection, could benefit from better automation and support for Windows environments.

I have been working with Orca Security for one to one and a half years.

Yes, as per my experience, it has been very helpful. In our organization, we did not find any major or priority one kind of alerts or risks because we had a very good infrastructure structure and cybersecurity architecture built in our organization. Orca Security helped us find what vulnerabilities or gaps existed which we could improve within our architecture. It helped us in such a way that we used to close the open ports and only allowed internal IPs for necessity. For staging environments and for prod we had DOS protection. If network traffic showed that anybody was trying to flood our systems, we would only accept all and our client-related IPs or an approved list of vendor lists we would have. We would get to know where the gaps are and where the improvements we could make. Being an analyst class engineer, I could use my brain in those areas and it was very helpful to have Orca Security in my arsenal.

Scaling up with Orca Security can depend on the organization's expectations. While it provides substantial cloud mitigation insights, other solutions such as SentinelOne that offer blocking and automation may also be considered. Improving Orca Security's ease of deployment and incorporating AI improvements could bolster its scalability potential.

We had Wazuh or Falco OSS or Aqua Security which was very excellent. It had blocking and cloud content but ops overhead was very high. Orca Security is very low on that. We also use SentinelOne which had blocking and its own automation, but cloud context is very less. We used to write a lot of manual rules for that which used to take our engineer's time. These are the three tools which I previously worked with and I know there are a lot of other tools in the market. In my experience, Orca Security was a top one or top three tool.

Orca Security integration was one of the easiest we have done because it is cloud-native and agentless. I would give five out of five for the integration part. Deployment is that easy in Orca Security. That is one top-notch quality with Orca Security.

When we had this Orca Security deployment, it was very fast and took very minimal time compared to other agents. The primary strength is that it has attack path plus workload visibility which is very important. For teams wanting best time to value with minimal setup, Orca Security would be the choice.

The deployment method is very manual and we can use Ansible or Terraform to deploy Orca Security, which is one big advantage. Orca Sensor has very low deployment complexity and very high cloud context correlation.

I was involved as part of the deployment of Orca Security in our organization as a technical team member responsible for integration. I had input on deployment architectures and project assignments to help reduce gaps and interpret reports and risks.

I have not utilized the Cloud to Dev feature. I do not know what level of subscription our company has taken for that feature. I think that is most suitably used in the development team. As per my knowledge, Cloud to Dev would be used for scanning Terraform or CloudFormation deployment config misconfigurations, which is what the cloud dev feature would be, but I have not used it because it is more of a developer thing. The overall review rating for Orca Security is seven out of ten.

Of my three customers, one is using Orca Security, and two are not using it. There are plenty of use cases available for Orca Security, and I can provide more details.

Orca Security is very good for faster management due to their CNAP, which stands for Cloud Native Application Protection Platform. It consolidates CSPM, CWPM, CWPP, and CAEM, which includes entitlement management and vulnerability scanning. Orca Security consolidates these solutions into a single platform. If I buy Orca Security, I can check data-related security posture management across various domains, including security and multi-cloud compliance. We put security at the forefront rather than waiting until project completion to engage security. It is important to place security in the field, and Orca Security is a very good tool for that.

Orca Security is an agentless vulnerability scanner, meaning we do not need to run any agents. The first use case is for consolidating various solutions into one. The second use case is agentless vulnerability scanning, and the third use case is for multi-cloud security. Some customers might have different cloud environments that can lead to vulnerabilities if not carefully managed, especially in stringent scenarios like FedRAMP. Orca Security is quite effective in these aspects, particularly for government and semi-government scenarios.

Orca Security serves to analyze configurations against what is optimally used and identify gaps. It identifies when servers are underutilized. For example, if a server is supposed to be at least eighty-eight percent utilized and is running below one percent, that results in unnecessary costs. This gap analysis is something every synaptic tool, including Orca Security, supports for cost optimization.

Orca Security has improved our cloud security visibility, streamlined vulnerability management, reduced alert fatigue through risk-based prioritization, and helped us remediate critical issues faster while maintaining compliance across our cloud environments.

Orca Security excels in identifying risks. If posture management is configured well, the tool performs effectively in identifying risks. I appreciate the tool as it finds various issues. In today's AI era, we see many new challenges, including tool poisoning and broken paths, which Orca Security identifies effectively. The tool captures all the risks related to entitlement management as well, focusing on the segregation of duties to minimize risks.

We use AI across the cloud environment, which helps in automating and remediating issues while enabling organizations to connect fragmented data for faster investigations and prioritizing measurable risks. Orca Security has seven distinct positive risks, including token theft and command injections, which are vital for security posture management.

I think Orca Security should be more SMB friendly since I mostly work with enterprise customers who have more budget. Orca Security could include options for smaller businesses and improve on areas like agentless functionalities and cost efficiency for small-scale deployments.

I work in an SMB organization and find Orca Security quite expensive. They typically offer some credit periods to conduct proofs of value for various products.

For enterprises, I find Orca Security to be fairly priced, whereas it is a bit more expensive for SMBs.

Everything is around five years, and I have been using it for the whole thing because I have been in this field since nineteen ninety-five. All these tools are five years old, maximum of five to six years old. In fact, they were born during my tenure.

Yes, Orca Security is generally considered a stable and mature enterprise-grade CNAPP (Cloud-Native Application Protection Platform) rather than an emerging startup product. However, stability can be viewed from three perspectives in my personal opinion, they are

1. Product Stability

2. Company Stability

3. Operational Stability

Yes. Scalability is actually one of the strongest differentiators of Orca Security compared to traditional agent-based cloud security platforms.

1. Agentless Architecture Eliminates Deployment Bottlenecks

Traditional CWPP and EDR-style cloud security solutions require agents on every VM, Kubernetes node, or workload. As organizations grow from hundreds to tens of thousands of cloud assets, agent deployment, upgrades, troubleshooting, and performance management become significant operational challenges.

Orca uses its patented Side Scanning™ technology to scan cloud workloads directly from cloud-provider storage snapshots and APIs without deploying agents. This means:

• No agent rollout projects
• No agent lifecycle management
• No performance impact on workloads
• New assets are automatically discovered and assessed

This architecture allows organizations to onboard large multi-cloud environments much faster than agent-centric solutions.

2. Designed for Large Multi-Cloud Estates

Orca supports:

• AWS
• Azure
• Google Cloud
• Oracle Cloud
• Alibaba Cloud
• Kubernetes environments

A large enterprise running thousands of subscriptions, accounts, projects, containers, and serverless workloads can manage them from a single platform and unified data model.

For organizations like:

• Global banks
• Telecom providers
• Retail giants
• SaaS companies

this becomes important because security teams do not need separate tools for CSPM, CWPP, CIEM, DSPM, vulnerability management, and container security.

3. Automatic Discovery of New Resources

One common scaling problem in cloud environments is asset churn:

• New VMs
• New Kubernetes clusters
• Auto-scaling groups
• Temporary containers
• Serverless functions

Orca automatically discovers and monitors newly created cloud assets without requiring manual updates or security onboarding processes. This is particularly valuable in DevOps-heavy environments where infrastructure changes continuously.

4. Unified Data Model Reduces Operational Complexity

Many enterprises end up with:

• Prisma Cloud
• Tenable
• Wiz
• CrowdStrike
• Native CSPM tools

all generating separate alerts.

Orca's Unified Data Model correlates:

• Vulnerabilities
• Misconfigurations
• IAM risks
• Sensitive data exposure
• Attack paths

into a single risk graph. This helps maintain operational scalability because the security team is not overwhelmed as cloud assets increase.

Orca Security's technical support is very good, aligning with my consulting operations, and I have not received any escalations.

In identifying risks with previous products, there are notable pros and cons between agent-based and agentless solutions. Agentless tools eliminate orchestration concerns, while agent-based tools allow more granular control and calculations.

The initial setup is straightforward, but I find it a bit complex due to the learning curve involved, which requires thorough guidance during the first configuration.

Yes, many organizations use either Orca Security Professional Services or partners such as Accenture, Deloitte, or Optiv for deployment. The feedback is generally positive, with customers highlighting fast onboarding, minimal operational overhead due to the agentless architecture, and strong implementation support. Orca Professional Services is often preferred for quicker deployments and product-specific expertise.

Regarding the time to value from Orca Security, if it is a SaaS setup, it is immediate. For larger solutions like ERP or MSSP setups, it can take more than six months. But for security scanning, it is shorter since we pay only for what we use.

Pricing was competitive for an enterprise-grade CNAPP platform, and the agentless architecture helped minimize deployment and maintenance costs. Licensing was straightforward, and the time-to-value was relatively fast compared to other cloud security solutions.

Among competitors like Trend Micro and Cisco, I compare Orca Security with offerings from those vendors based on features and costs.

In terms of objectives, I need functionality without paying a luxury price. The features offered by some competitors may be attractive, but what counts most is that Orca Security provides essential functions with lower costs.

I cannot provide a straightforward answer about the time it takes to address cloud security alerts because different levels of alerts exist, and fixing each alert can vary depending on how alerts are configured. Policies play a crucial role in alert management.

If SaaS is available, customers prefer it due to low engagement compared to hybrid models. The cost savings on SaaS are quite attractive.

Orca Security's ability to combine functionalities of multiple tools into one platform is indeed one of its strongest points.

I would rate support at eight plus points. My personal rating for Orca Security as a service provider would be nine.

Orca Security provides three main strategic advantages. First, there is 100% visibility because it does not require agents. It can see everything, even shadowing or abandoned servers that the security team did not know existed. The main responsibility is side scanning, which is the first technology by Orca Security. Second, there is context-aware risk prioritization. Instead of drowning security teams in a sea of maybe 10,000 alerts, Orca Security uses a graph-based engine. It understands that a vulnerability on a web-facing server with access to a database is much more dangerous than the same vulnerability on a test server with no internet access. Third, there is operational efficiency. It saves hundreds of hours for DevOps teams who no longer have to install, update, or troubleshoot security.

I find Orca’s secret scanning and 'Shift Left' capabilities to be most valuable. The platform integrates directly into our GitHub and Azure DevOps pipelines, which allows us to automatically analyze pull requests for hardcoded passwords, API keys, and other sensitive credentials.

I see vulnerabilities as an area for improvement. In my opinion, the other platforms, such as Qualys and Prisma Cloud, have more efficiency in vulnerability detection, but Orca Security is not as strong in this area.

It is necessary to have a team because there is more responsibility, more activities, and it is necessary to have different opinions.

For example, when I have subscriptions by Azure or accounts by AWS, it is necessary to perform maintenance because you have to add a new subscription or new accounts in Orca Security. This configuration is not automatic; it is manual.

I have been working with Orca Security for one year.

It is necessary to have a team because there is more responsibility, more activities, and it is necessary to have different opinions.

Technical support is very good, but customer support is very poor, in my opinion, because when I have a few problems, the customer support says your solution is bad or it is easier. However, the technical support is very good.

For example, the technical support has more experience in the solution, but customer support does not have more experience in the solution. Customer support does not know Orca Security in general. I think they have different skill sets.

Negative

Orca Security is easier to use than other alternatives. You need a little skill to dominate Orca Security compared to other options. For example, when I use Prisma Cloud or Qualys solution, you need more experience. Orca Security is more user-friendly and in this case is more enjoyable.

The deployment of Orca Security depends on the context because, for example, when I deploy in virtual machines, Kubernetes, or any resource, it is very easy. However, when I use other solutions by Orca Security, such as AppSec, it is more difficult.

Currently the pricing for Orca Security is good, but it is probable that in the future the price will increase and I will analyze another alternative. For now, it is acceptable.

Similar solutions to Orca Security are Prisma Cloud, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Wiz, and Qualys. However, I think Prisma Cloud is the same as Orca Security, but Prisma Cloud is more expensive than Orca Security.

Cloud security analyzes vulnerabilities or alerts by IaaS or PaaS because Orca Security analyzes these items very well. Side scanning is, in my opinion, the best tool by Orca Security. However, it is necessary to deploy the sensor agent in new tools, such as Kubernetes, Lambda functions, and other services.

The sensor feature is good, but I prefer to use another alternative. For example, CSA by Cloud Security Alliance or by PCI or by CIS control is not optimized in Orca Security. I prefer to use another platform because these frameworks are more structured than Orca Security.

AppSec by Orca Security is the most interesting feature because it analyzes keys, passwords, and any methods for pull requests because it has integration with GitHub, Azure DevOps, and other platforms.

Orca Security continues to remodel the look and feel of the solution. In my opinion, it is very good. I would rate this review an eight out of ten.

I normally use Orca Security for AppSec, and one of the features that I use commonly is the application security. I love it because it's already covered in the same license, and I can get a good overview of all of my assets. I have a lot of accounts in cloud, and so it's sometimes hard to identify all activities or assets that have been used or not. Normally, some developers create some virtual machines and leave the VM on or don't remove it. Orca Security usually helps me to see these kinds of problems because I can see every asset in one platform.

I don't use the Cloud to Dev feature they mentioned, since I'm working with Orca Security directly.

I believe the feature referred to as Orca Sensor is cloud security detection. I use it frequently because it's very important. I really enjoy it because it's agentless. I don't need to install or build an agent in my assets in the cloud. Orca Security accomplished this safely and fast. It's pretty easy to identify security risks or security issues using Orca Security because it's totally agentless and I just need to connect my cloud environment. It's really good and pretty easy. They have one feature that I really like in this same vein; it's the news about security. For example, if a new vulnerability is found and it's not already published in a CVSS bug, Orca Security has new papers that already inform me, stating that I have this new issue and this asset has been affected by this new vulnerability, and it provides guidance on how I can fix it. I love it.

What I love most about Orca Security is the easy integration with other tools. I really like it because it's very easy to integrate with other tools that are important for the company. It's already set up in the platform easily. I don't need to do unusual modifications or create a script. It's pretty easy to integrate these tools.

It is easy to prioritize risks using Orca Security because they have already been categorized. The severity of some risks is delivered from Orca Security, and I can set some kind of high-value asset designation. I can define what is a high-value asset or not. The attack paths also help me to understand the prioritization of the risks of these assets.

Orca Security has helped my company reduce the time it needs to address cloud security alerts and make it faster. When one critical risk or high risk is identified in my environment, I already receive notifications, even in email or in Teams, Slack, or any channel that is integrable to Orca Security. I receive a very fast notification to address the vulnerability and security issues to the teams.

I think the downside of Orca Security is the reports. I don't have any good reports ready to deliver to an executive. If I need to deliver some reports to my account manager or an executive, I don't have anything ready. I need to extract information and put it in another tool to construct some reports or dashboards or to report to my manager.

I've been using Orca Security for exactly one year and one month.

Normally, I don't have any problem with maintenance in Orca Security platform. I don't have any downtime using it for this one year. When I need any support, it's very fast to get an answer from the support team.

I don't have any lagging using Orca Security. As I said, using it for one year, I don't have any downtimes.

From what I’ve seen, I think it’s really easy to scale your usage. I did a POC (Proof of Concept) where I extended some workloads and it was very easy, but I don't use it frequently in production, just in that Proof of Concept.

Not so many people are required for the deployment of Orca Security; just one person can do it.

I have been in contact with technical support regarding Orca Security twice to solve some issues, but it wasn't an issue, just a wrong configuration that I made. I contacted them and they shared some documentation. After that, I could resolve it pretty well.

Positive

I tried similar solutions from Trend Micro. From Trend Micro, I also tried a new one that is called Wiz. Orca Security is the best one for me because it delivers all the things that I need and more.

The initial deployment of Orca Security was pretty easy from my point of view.

It took just one hour to create the roles and the credentials for Orca Security. Then I just need to wait for the time for Orca Security to enrich data and index data in the platform. On the first day, I can already use Orca Security fully and identify every resource.

For my company, I don't use a huge workload. It's a small workload, around 90 workloads, but we have more. For this amount of workload, the price is high. When you have more workloads, the price is much better. I think it's not so expensive when you have the right amount of workloads. It's more directed toward big companies.

I have tried to use Cloud Cost Optimization with Orca Security. We used it to reduce some costs by removing some unused assets. It really helped us, but I don't think that is the main focus of Orca Security. I use other tools to do FinOps in a better way.

I use a reseller that is a partner that helps me with Orca Security. I am just a client, but we have a company that sold Orca Security to us, and they are the bridge between my company and Orca Security company.

I would rate this product a 10 out of 10.

My use case involves being in charge of the integration of this technology for over 100 clients in different environments.

The best features of Orca Security include automation and compatibility, which I really appreciate, and many of my clients value them as well. We have access to many features that differentiate this solution from other systems offering the same capabilities. For me, the most important aspect is how deeply you can investigate situations with this technology, including checking for leaks or similar issues.

In our opinion, Orca Sensor is the best solution available at the moment, and it significantly affects the visibility and protection of environments.

Identifying areas in Orca Security that have room for improvement is challenging, as there are multiple considerations including price, customization, AI, UI, and factors that could make it better or easier to use. I must consult with someone in the field because I cannot provide this information at this time since I am not operating the solution directly.

What would make it a ten for me as an integrator is difficult to determine. I believe they need more time developing this solution, which means they need to be more comprehensive and extended in their approach. I think this represents the opinion of the majority.

I have been using Orca Security for more than one year, approximately eighteen months.

I would rate stability as an eight or nine because, as an integrator, I do not experience downtime, bugs, or glitches.

I believe Orca Security is scalable and can handle small and medium-enterprise businesses effectively. I would rate it an eight for scalability.

It is difficult to rate the technical support provided by Orca Security because I do not use it and therefore cannot speak to its quality.

We use Orca Security and have used different solutions in the past, and this is one of the most useful for us.

The overall deployment is medium difficulty; it is not easy, but it is not complex either.

How long deployment takes on average depends entirely on the amount of data and the questions we receive from the client's side. There are many factors to keep in mind, and the deployment timeline is influenced by various considerations.

I cannot tell you how it affects the process in addressing cloud risks early in development because I do not have this information. You must understand that I am in charge of the integration group. I am not integrating this myself, and while I have some knowledge, I am not in the field doing this job.

We have approximately 300 people working with Orca Security in our organization.

My thoughts on the pricing of Orca Security are that it is neither cheap nor expensive; it is somewhere in the middle.

In my opinion, Orca Security compares to other products and vendors on the market as something disruptive. I believe it can be very interesting at this moment.

We and our clients do use the Cloud to Dev feature. I believe we have some clients using it.

We do not use the sensor for cloud detection and response as much, as we have another technology we are using for this purpose.

I find it quite easy to prioritize risks using Orca Security; it is not difficult at all.

I would recommend Orca Security to other users. It is a face-to-face approach that we normally recommend for establishing a more efficient ecosystem for them. It is a prime solution for us and one of the most important.

My impressions of the risk detection and identification capabilities are very good. I would rate them eight, nine, or even closer to nine than eight.

Orca Security requires maintenance, and all solutions need updates, patching, and renewals. I find it more easy to maintain Orca Security.

I would rate this solution an eight overall.

My main use case for Orca Security is cloud security posture management for our cloud in the company.

A specific example of how I use Orca Security for cloud security posture management is that we connect Orca Security to our main cloud providers, it scans all of the configurations, and it lets us know if we have risks in our configurations and how to mitigate them, and also it helps us to prioritize those risks.

I would also like to add that we are evaluating using Orca Security for scanning Infrastructure as Code and scripts.

In my opinion, the best features Orca Security offers include the integration to our cloud services, which is smooth, easy, and plug and play, along with its effectiveness in prioritizing risks, taking into account all of the different factors that make a risk—not only vulnerabilities but also if you have sensitive data or if you have your cloud resources exposed, giving you the risk based on that context, which helps you to prioritize the risks to know where to mitigate first.

This has changed the way my team works and responds to threats because it saves us a lot of time and helps us to focus on the real risk rather than all of the alerts that we receive, as we have a lot; therefore, we cannot fix everything and need to prioritize, making the way that Orca Security prioritizes the risks key for us.

Orca Security has impacted my organization positively by giving us visibility on what is happening in the cloud and helping us detect risks fast. Before Orca Security, we did not have that visibility, and we had to manually check our cloud to understand if we had risks. Today, with Orca Security, we are comfortable and feel that we have the visibility that we need in the cloud to be sure that we do not have risks there.

I would add that the CDR, the Cloud Detection and Response that Orca Security offers, could be improved as it is not the best functionality that it offers. Orca Security is good at posture, but not at the response and alerting in real time.

Orca Security can be improved as it is very good at posture, but it does not detect attacks or behavioral attacks in the cloud on its own; it depends on other security features or logs like GuardDuty from Amazon, lacking its own intelligence to detect and respond to attacks.

Additionally, it could be useful if Orca Security has more context on the network and how the resources are exposed. For example, it could take into account that we have a firewall in front of an S3 in Amazon and understand that we do not have so much risk there because of that firewall, incorporating the network topology context, which today does not function as it should.

I have been using Orca Security for three years.

In my experience, Orca Security is stable.

Orca Security's scalability is quite good; it scales smoothly, and adding more resources or clouds is easy.

Orca Security's customer support is not very good. We are practically alone; we do not use the support, and they are not very responsive.

I did not previously use a different solution for cloud security.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is good. The costs are reasonable, licensing is clear, and the renewal process is good.

We do not see a return on investment in that way; rather, we see that we improve our risk posture, as we have detected risks that without Orca Security, we would not have detected. In that sense, I can say that it mitigates risks, but I do not have a metric on that.

We do not have specific metrics; however, I can say that in the past, it took us two to three hours a week to do manual checks, whereas today with Orca Security, we just check the dashboard for ten minutes a day and that is all.

Before choosing Orca Security, I evaluated other options, specifically Wiz.

My advice to others looking into using Orca Security is to access the console every day to see if you have risks, to try to stay close to customer support to understand new features, and to not rely on the CDR because it is not very effective. I rated this product an eight out of ten.

My use cases for Orca Security include working with the sales team and the pre-sales team to offer Orca Security in the Chilean market with an integrator or a partner of Orca Security. The real impact when the client or the potential client sees the POC is truly awesome because you can have 100% visibility since Orca Security provides full coverage across your entire cloud estate across AWS, Azure, and GCP within minutes, finding shadow assets that traditional tools like Cortex or Prisma from Palo Alto cannot detect.

Orca Security has other strategic features such as CNAPP or Cloud Network Application Protection Platform capabilities, including CSPM (Cloud Security Posture Management). You can detect misconfiguration and ensure compliance with frameworks like SOC 2, ISO 27001, or GDPR of the European Union. Another valuable feature is the Cloud Workload Protection Platform, where you can identify vulnerabilities such as CVEs, malware, and exposed secrets such as API keys or passwords inside your workloads during scanning. Another feature is Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management, where you can manage identities and permissions to enforce least privilege and find overprivileged accounts. Finally, there is Data Security Posture Management, where Orca Security can automatically discover and protect sensitive data such as PII and PHI to prevent data breaches.

Orca Security is a really strong product because it has a lot of different differentiators. Orca Security is based on agentless side scanning, so it has the ability to scan cloud workloads including virtual machines, containers, and serverless infrastructure all without installing any software or agents. This results in zero performance impact on production, which I think is the most important thing in the market share or in an eventual Gartner Quadrant.

Orca Security helps in preventing risks and attacks across the application lifecycles by scanning not only the apps in production, but also the apps or microservices in development. This provides complete visibility to your infrastructure.

The price is one thing I would like to see improved because the pricing is a little elevated, as the pricing is based on the quantity of workloads. However, I think that since Orca Security is a medium company, you can negotiate the pricing if you are a medium company.

My experience with Orca Security is recent, approximately eight months ago.

We had a problem with the uptime with a really important client. I think the capability to respond to those kinds of issues was a little vague. I found it a little unprofessional.

I find Orca Security scalable. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it six or seven.

The problem with the Orca Security technical support team and customer service team is that Orca Security is a medium company and I think they do not have a large team. If you have a lot of problems, you will receive an unprofessional service or unprofessional customer service because you do not have an entire team to respond to all of those kinds of problems.

I would rate the technical support team as a six.

Positive

The deployment is frictionless, and I think that feature is one of the most important.

I remember that the read-only connection is the deployment model we were using for Orca Security. Deployment is completely out of band, so we simply connect Orca Security through a read-only IAM role or service account at the cloud root level. You need root access.

The ROI or return on investment with Orca Security might be favorable. The TCO or Total Cost of Ownership is an important term. While the initial sticker price might be higher than point solutions, the total cost of ownership is much lower. This is because you do not need a team of five persons to install and update the agents in thousands of servers. The operational overhead is equal to zero.

I have not worked with the Orca Security Cloud Cost Optimization feature. The price is one thing I would like to see improved because the pricing is a little elevated, as the pricing is based on the quantity of workloads. However, since Orca Security is a medium company, you can negotiate the pricing if you are a medium company.

I did not evaluate other options.

Overall, my impressions of the risk detection and identification capabilities of Orca Security are that it has the capability to scan and show you all your infrastructure. If you have any kind of vulnerabilities, you can see them. It is very important to see all your infrastructure and all the possible ways to have vulnerabilities. Another important thing is if you need to scan all your workloads.

Overall, I think Orca Security is the leader because of the strategic features I mentioned. It is easy to analyze and detect breaches, anomalies, and misconfiguration. It is a tool that is designed to be very user-friendly.

The real value of Orca Security is not just finding vulnerabilities but reducing the noise so the security team can focus on the critical attack path. Orca Security is a really complete tool for cloud security. I think Orca Security reduces alert volume by focusing only on the one percent of risk that actually matters, which I refer to as the one percent rule. Orca Security filters the noise and reduces alert fatigue.

My advice for other organizations considering Orca Security is to remember that Orca Security is a great product, but the team should work on customer service. I gave this review an overall rating of eight.

I implement Orca Security on B3 to improve my security maturity in cloud environments, mitigate risks, and correct vulnerabilities and resolve some issues.

I appreciate Orca Security because I can see CSPM, KSPM, and DSPM. Orca Security works with major frameworks on security, such as NIST and CIS, allowing me to see comprehensive insights on my cloud environment. I appreciate the Orca Security CI/CD integration, the shift-left configuration, which helps me improve cloud maturity and DevSecOps maturity. From my perspective, Orca Security is a complete CNAPP platform with the most capabilities to work with cloud security.

I have concerns about OCI support. When I work with Orca Security, the support for OCI is limited, so I cannot effectively work with the OCI environment.

I have used Orca Security for one year.

I do not see any lagging, crashing, or downtime in Orca Security. In my time working with Orca Security, I have not experienced downtime on the platform.

I think the scalability of Orca Security is good. I did not have a problem with scalability, as it works effectively for my scenario and environment.

In my case, I had technical support, and it is easy to contact the technical support. The quality of the support is good. If I were to rate the support on a scale from one to ten, I would give it an eight.

Positive

I worked with Prisma Cloud, an alternative platform for cloud security from Palo Alto, and I worked with the Rapid7 platform as well as Tenable, so there are other vendors with the same concept platform as Orca Security.

The initial deployment of Orca Security is easy; it is just plug-and-play on the cloud environment. When I deployed Orca Security for the first time, it took me around two days for cloud environments, no more.

A team is needed for deployment; one person cannot deploy it.

I see the benefits of Orca Security immediately because you can see the issues right after deployment, and you can correct the critical issues, so the proof of value is immediate.

Compared with other vendors, the Orca Security pricing is very competitive, and I think it is a good price compared with the other vendors.

I do not use Orca Security agentless exclusively for vulnerabilities. I appreciate Orca Security because it is a complete platform and its cost is very small compared with other vendors. I think the user interface of Orca Security is very intuitive, friendly, and easy to use. It takes me very little time to learn how to use Orca Security; I find it very easy to learn, and the documentation is online and intuitive. Overall, I would rate Orca Security at a nine out of ten.