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

CoreOS Clair vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
112
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd)
CoreOS Clair
Ranking in Container Security
27th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (9th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (4th), Compliance Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.4%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CoreOS Clair is 0.5%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 7.2%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
Felipe Giffu - PeerSpot reviewer
An operational system, similar to Linux where you can run your applications inside containers
With CoreOS, you can run your applications inside containers. For example, if you have an application that needs to run on Linux, you can create and install a container. However, it's important to note that you don't install CoreOS inside a container; CoreOS is the host operating system that manages containers. When you mentioned using Nacula as part of your CI/CD pipeline, it means your application is deployed and managed automatically through the CI/CD process. Containers are used to deploy your application within this pipeline, but CoreOS does not run inside these containers. Instead, CoreOS is the base operating system that supports and manages these containers.
Vibhor Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps
Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"The most valuable feature is the notification system, providing real-time alerts and comparisons crucial for maintaining security."
"The most valuable features of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"The offensive security feature is valuable because it publicly detects the offensive and vulnerable things present in our domain or applications. It checks any applications with public access. Some of the applications give public access to certain files or are present over a particular domain. It detects and lets us know with evidence. That is quite good. It is protecting our infrastructure quite well."
"Cloud Native Security is user-friendly. Everything in the Cloud Native Security tool is straightforward, including detections, integration, reporting, etc. They are constantly improving their UI by adding plugins and other features."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's graph explorer is a valuable tool that lets us visualize all connected services."
"Singularity Cloud Native Security provides us with a platform to scan instances when they are getting created, and the dashboard helps us to identify the critical issues."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"With CoreOS, you can run your applications inside containers. For example, if you have an application that needs to run on Linux, you can create and install a container. However, it's important to note that you don't install CoreOS inside a container; CoreOS is the host operating system that manages containers."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud helps in improving our overall security posture. We have a nice overview of what is missing where and what can be improved."
"Scalability is great, and I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the remote workforce capabilities and the general experience of the remote workforce."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is its ability to assess an environment and give us a clear idea of what security components are lacking and which are not."
"The most valuable feature is the comprehensive overview across different workloads. It allows us to see protection not just across one workload, such as virtual machines, containers, infrastructure, or data, but across all our workloads. This overall visibility is really helpful."
"It helps you to identify the gaps in your solution and remediate them. It produces a compliance checklist against known standards such as ISO 27001, HIPAA, iTrust, etc."
 

Cons

"One potential drawback is the cost of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security, which may be prohibitive for smaller businesses or startups, particularly those in regions with lower average incomes, such as India."
"The reporting works well, but sometimes the severity classifications are inaccurate. Sometimes, it flags an issue as high-impact, but it should be a lower severity."
"The integration with Oracle has room for improvement."
"We recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"The price is on the higher side. The dashboard can be more detailed."
"Cloud Native Security's reporting could be better. We are unable to see which images are impacted. Several thousand images have been deployed, so if we can see some application-specific information in the dashboard, we can directly send that report to the team that owns the application. We'd also like the option to download the report from the portal instead of waiting for the report to be sent to our email."
"When we request any changes, they must be reflected in the next update."
"There's an array of upcoming versions with numerous features to be incorporated into the roadmap. Customers particularly appreciate the service's emphasis on intensive security, especially the secret scanning aspect. During the proof of concept (POC) phase, the system is required to gather logs from the customer's environment. This process entails obtaining specific permissions, especially in terms of gateway access. While most permissions for POC are manageable, the need for various permissions may need improvement, especially in the context of security."
"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
"It can be improved in its support response. They usually take up to seven days to resolve the issue."
"The remediation process could be improved."
"There is no perfect product in the world and there are always features that can be added."
"One of the main challenges that we have been facing with Azure Security Center is the cost. The costs are really a complex calculation, e.g., to calculate the monthly costs. Azure is calculating on an hourly basis for use of the resource. Because of this, we found it really complex to promote what will be our costs for the next couple of months. I think if Azure could reduce the complex calculation and come up with straightforward cost mapping that would be very useful from a product point of view."
"Microsoft Graph needs improvement."
"The range of workloads is broad, but we'd love to add more workloads and make it a single security solution that covers all those workloads. Covering more would allow us to see and protect more workloads from a single pane of glass. Additional features should include protection for more AI workloads as it currently focuses primarily on OpenAI."
"Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something."
"For improvements, I'd like to see more use cases integrated with Microsoft Sentinel and support for multi-cloud environments beyond just Azure."
"As an analyst, there is no way to configure or create a playbook to automate the process of flagging suspicious domains."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing is constant. It has been constant over the previous year, so I am happy with it. However, price distribution can be better explained. That is the only area I am worried about. Otherwise, the pricing is very reasonable."
"The pricing is somewhat high compared to other market tools."
"It's a fair price for what you get. We are happy with the price as it stands."
"I understand that SentinelOne is a market leader, but the bill we received was astronomical."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"The pricing for PingSafe in India was more reasonable than other competitors."
"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."
"SentinelOne offers excellent pricing and licensing options."
"CoreOS Clair is open-source and free of charge."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"Our clients complain about the cost of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"There are improvements that have to be made to the licensing. Currently, for servers, it has to be done by grouping the servers on a single subscription... We don't have an option whereby, if all those resources are in one subscription, we can have each of the individual servers subject to different planning."
"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."
"The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against the importance of what needs covering."
"The tool is pretty expensive."
"They have a free version, but the license for this one isn't too high. It's free to start with, and you're charged for using it beyond 30 days. Some other pieces of Defender are charged based on usage, so you will be charged more for a high volume of transactions. I believe Defender for Cloud is a daily charge based on Azure's App Service Pricing."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is an excellent CSPM tool, but its CWPP features need improvement, and there i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CoreOS Clair?
If you work with CoreOS or OpenShift, you don't need to pay for CoreOS separately. When you pay for OpenShift, you ge...
What needs improvement with CoreOS Clair?
It can be improved in its support response. They usually take up to seven days to resolve the issue.
What is your primary use case for CoreOS Clair?
We use the tool to manage and secure the event file system. CoreOS Clair is an operational system that is very simila...
How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening acros...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The cost is generally reasonable. Microsoft Defender for Cloud Plan 2 costs $15 per server, per month. For a normal c...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
eBay, Veritas, Verizon, SalesForce
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about CoreOS Clair vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.