We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Pentera based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"What I like the most about Pentera is its solution-oriented approach."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of Pentera is that you can do continuous vulnerability assessment, which is automated."
"Maybe there are some remediation steps on the website, we can mask sensitive information on the website better."
"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware."
"Maybe scalability. I know that the Pentera right now is high level in order to scan big deals over 500 IPs and not less, and not less. That can be more granular. This will be useful."
"The vulnerability scanner, exploit achievements, and remediation actions are all great."
"There is room for improvement in virtualization compatibility."
"The price could be improved."
"Pentera's general dashboards could be improved and made more specific in terms of vulnerabilities that I'm discovering."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 4th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 17 reviews while Pentera is ranked 1st in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 5 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Pentera is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation writes "Allowed us to build out a data center topology without worrying about placement of physical or virtual firewalls that can create bottlenecks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pentera writes "A stable solution that can be used to do continuous and automated vulnerability assessments". Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is most compared with Illumio, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Workload, Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, whereas Pentera is most compared with Cymulate, Tenable Nessus, Picus Security, Horizon3.ai and Qualys VMDR. See our Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Pentera report.
See our list of best Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) vendors.
We monitor all Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) 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.