Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CloudPassage vs Prevasio comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

CloudPassage
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
49th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (40th)
Prevasio
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
39th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Container Monitoring (11th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) category, the mindshare of CloudPassage is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Prevasio is 0.1%, down from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user854058 - PeerSpot reviewer
It helped us be more aware of what our security posture is, but not all of the features work in my environment
I would say CloudPassage is very useful for certain things. If you just want a few modules then focus on what you need and negotiate the price based on the individual module, rather than looking at the whole thing, because I didn't find all the modules very useful. Also, use Splunk in combination with it if you want reporting. I would give CloudPassage at least a seven out of 10. I rate it on the high-end because of the customer support - I've never seen any support that is comparable to that, it's very good, excellent. The support staff actually care, they actually follow up; it's very nice. And CloudPassage really listens to its customers. The product itself is very nice if you're only looking to check off your compliance requirements, but if you're looking for more of dashboarding and things like that, CloudPassage is improving but it's not quite there.
Reviewer75941 - PeerSpot reviewer
An excellent, intelligent tool that is helpful for finding duplicate rules
AFA is helpful when finding duplicate rules, subnets, and policies for your ports that have not been used in the last six months. It also helps to find out which ports have been opened for all firewalls. After that, we run the reports and share them with the customer. After getting approval from the customer, if there is a block on a particular port or ports not used in a current environment, Analyzer is helpful when placing the change request of the users. In this case, AlgoSec provides the link to the user who raises the request though the automation, which is the change request. From that change request, it comes through our ticketing tools, e.g., BMC Remedy. Then, we have to check and approve it. Once it gets approved, we deploy the particular policies, as per the user's request. It provides visibility for the risk. Whenever unnecessary ports have been opened in our environment, whether by mistake or human error, a support ticket gets opened so we can find out about it in an easy way. After that, we can implement or block the particular ports if they are not necessary for the organization's production. The solution has become more helpful during the cleanup rules for the firewall, when we do those activities twice a month. For example, if a user raises a request two to three months ago, then we forget to block the particular port by human error. During the client's cleanup workshop, we can make things clearer, which is more useful for us when cleaning up unnecessary rules and ports from the firewall. AlgoSec enables us to manage these hybrid environments in a single pane of glass. It is an excellent, intelligent tool. The console is user-friendly for understanding and implementing things on firewalls. It is helpful for finding duplicate rules.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Key features are the Software Vulnerability Assessment and the CSM, which is the configuration check."
"Policies are very easy to manage on a day-to-day basis."
"AlgoSec has good tools to manage policies and devices. Many administrators like how it helps you monitor and clean up the policy for the on-premise firewall."
"We have Check Point, Palo Alto, and FortiGate firewalls, and it integrates pretty seamlessly with these firewalls. We have had no issues so far."
"The firewall policy summarization is the most valuable feature. It helps us to cross-check the firewall ruleset. That's the main purpose of it. And of course, it monitors changes of the firewall policy. It provides full visibility into the risk involved in firewall change requests. It helps us to check for any integrity issues and conflicts with other rulesets, and of course the compliance."
"The optimizations are the most useful aspect because most customers have a very unmanaged network with a lot of rules. We use a lot of the optimizations in our reports for improving firewall rules."
"The most valuable feature is the automation that can be accomplished by using scripts. If we didn't have AlgoSec, I would have to do everything manually."
"Because we get about 60 to 70 rules to deploy a week during the firewall maintenance window, we might create some duplicate rules or open duplicate ports. AlgoSec has become very helpful whenever we need to find out the nodes or subnets that have already been created, then we don't need to create the duplicate subnet of that particular IP address."
"AlgoBot is a Slack chatbot that they've designed to help people identify if the firewalls are going to allow or block specific network traffic. We leveraged this to allow our staff to check themselves if the firewalls are going to be blocking traffic or not. That saves us logging into the firewalls and running the query off the host. We give them the power to use it and it saves us time."
"We have used the solution to implement and manage microsegmentation initiatives. That is the whole point of modeling towards, "Hey, how will this work for a specific situation in the end?" I think it's a great solution because a lot of companies are not just going to the cloud, but microsegmentation and service-delivered products. So, I feel like it is very capable and comparatively better than its peers, if not equal."
 

Cons

"The reports and graphs are unintuitive."
"In the CSM module the policies are really hard to work with it. It is not very flexible at all. I would suggest that they change that. Right now, the scan is based on the group that the server is in. What happens if the server is in multiple groups?"
"Of all the advertised functions, I only find two things that really work in my environment, even though I wanted to use all of them. They're not flexible enough to be used."
"Anything outside of the software vulnerability management and the CSM, things like the GhostPort, need some improvement. The dashboard is in beta. It looks really good, I wish it would come out of beta."
"The API integration could potentially improve. I didn't get a chance to look and see how well this solution can integrate with ServiceNow or our GRC environment."
"The technical support response time is low. This might be due to the coronavirus pandemic situation, but I am not getting full support when working with them."
"We work with multiple security vendors. It's rather difficult to integrate the vendors. AlgoSec is a platform that hasn't really been developed as much as we would like to just because of its complexity to set up. If it was easy to set up and easy to get integrations with other companies, then we would be doing it. But the thought is that we are relatively stretched thin in our team as it is and the complexity of configuring AlgoSec doesn't make it any easier."
"In the new version H32, there are many, many bugs."
"When we send multiple requests across at once, sometimes it causes errors and FireFlow gets stuck. In cases like this, we have to go back in and fix it."
"The analysis part can be improved when I make a flow request. There should be a clear analysis of which metric part needs to be opened and which firewalls will be opened. It should give you a bit more graphical visibility about these."
"Integration with Oracle on the cloud is not supported. I would also like to see integrations with network devices in Layer 2."
"Now that we've moved to the VM it is more stable and independent of hardware."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We also evaluated VMware NSX, but the pricing and features available in a CloudPassage implementation were decisive in deciding to go with CP."
"CloudPassage is a little bit on the expensive side. So my suggestion is that the company lower its price point a wee bit or sell modules, separate them in modules, because I only find two things that are useful to me, yet I pay for four or five modules. It didn't seem like it was a fair deal."
"For the South American market, the prices are very high."
"I heard that the licensing was around $100,000 a year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Comparisons

No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

CloudPassage Halo
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Citrix
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about CloudPassage vs. Prevasio and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.