We performed a comparison between Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) and Tenable.io Container Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."AKS as a service is very good when you need to leverage applications or functions with much variability in their usage because you're trying to be as efficient as you can with resources."
"Has a good management feature monitored by the cloud service provider."
"Its support team resolves technical issues accurately."
"The product’s most valuable features are ease of use and automation."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the diagnostic service."
"I found the Helm deployment feature of the solution valuable."
"AKS is easy to use. We can scale up and down as needed with AKS, which saves us money on our cloud costs."
"The advantage of AKS is somewhat greater than that of Kubernetes, such as those provided by Google Cloud or AWS. However, the unique benefit offered by Microsoft is its robust CI/CD capabilities, along with the Azure feature for building workflows. When you combine the entire ecosystem, AKS becomes an excellent choice, particularly for enterprise applications."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
"Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"The solution should improve its UI and cost."
"AKS has the potential to enhance pricing by enabling us to explore ways to increase cost transparency. However, it's important to note that this refers to computation costs rather than client costs. Our objective is to optimize efficiency and minimize unnecessary expenses. Therefore, we aim to identify which services within the platform can benefit from improved consumption patterns. This is the focus of our ongoing research, with the goal of maximizing computational power within the cluster. We aim to avoid situations where resources are reserved but not utilized effectively. Additionally, our strong emphasis on security ensures that we adhere to all relevant compliance standards, bolstering our overall trustworthiness."
"The initial setup of AKS is complicated. The setup depends on the cluster, nodes, and lots of other things. There are also lots of extremely critical small devices. Moreover, you will have to pay them even while setting up the solution. It is not like you setup first and then pay for it."
"More control over Infra scanning can be introduced."
"AKS could enhance its functionality by introducing a blueprint feature that streamlines and expedites the process. With a blueprint, users can leverage pre-defined configurations, including some common survey elements, reducing the need for extensive customization and allowing us to focus on our core business activities. Additionally, if the blueprint covers security aspects, it would be greatly beneficial, as it eliminates the need for us to build security expertise from scratch. Currently, we encounter challenges during cloud onboarding, security implementation, and adapting to Kubernetes. Although Microsoft may not consider these as their direct responsibility, providing a blueprint similar to what they offer to developers would be highly advantageous."
"Sometimes, it fails to provide specific metrics."
"The application firewall is lacking some features and there is room for enhancement."
"One area that could be improved is the Azure CLI. It would be beneficial if they could abstract some of the complexities related to deployment scripts and make them a part of Azure CLI."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"The stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
More Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable.io Container Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is ranked 13th in Container Security with 32 reviews while Tenable.io Container Security is ranked 22nd in Container Security with 7 reviews. Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is rated 8.2, while Tenable.io Container Security is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) writes "Decreases administrative burdens and costs, has good diagnostic tools, and is easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tenable.io Container Security writes "It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with". Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) is most compared with OpenShift, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security, SUSE Rancher, Qualys VMDR and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, whereas Tenable.io Container Security is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, Wiz, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS) vs. Tenable.io Container Security report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors.
We monitor all Container Security 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.
