We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Verodin based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Pentera, Cymulate, Picus Security and others in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)."Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"This tool greatly helps in understanding the footprint of the attacks."
"From day one, you get threat intelligence. It will immediately block active threats, which has been useful."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"The tool is a complete package that offers many features like visibility. You can get a graph with real-time workflows and visibility into server-to-server communication. We get visibility into many things happening within our environment."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of processes and connections."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is constantly updating. Their data and security validation are cutting-edge."
"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."
"It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"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."
"Sometimes, the speed needs improvement, especially when it comes to the generation of maps, where it can be a bit slow."
"The integration engine needs to improve."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 4th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 17 reviews while Verodin is ranked 10th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS). Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Verodin is rated 7.0. 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 Verodin writes "Stable with good updates but needs a better integration engine". 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 Verodin is most compared with AttackIQ, Picus Security, Cymulate, Pentera and SafeBreach.
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.
