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

Cybersixgill vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 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

Zafran Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
18th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) (2nd)
Cybersixgill
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
66th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (20th), Digital Risk Protection (6th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (29th)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Vulnerability Management
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Container Management (8th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Vulnerability Management category, the mindshare of Zafran Security is 0.8%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cybersixgill is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 5.7%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Vulnerability Management
 

Featured Reviews

Israel Cavazos Landini - PeerSpot reviewer
Weekly insights and risk analysis facilitate informed security decisions
I appreciate the weekly insights Zafran provides, which include critical topics for networks and IT security, allowing us to evaluate which insights apply to our environment. The organization score feature is valuable to keep the leadership team updated on how our infrastructure fares security-wise. The applicable risk level versus base risk level feature is beneficial because prior to Zafran, we only used the base risk level, but now understand that risk depends on the asset itself. Zafran is an excellent tool.
reviewer1528356 - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides early detection of imminent attacks, and speeds up addressing of vulnerabilities internally because it makes them real
They're a newer company, so they're working on their UI a lot. Sometimes the UI is a little glitchy. They're working on different things and making efforts, so that's totally forgivable. But regarding their scraping abilities, things could be solidified. There are definitely improvements that could be made on the specificity for setting certain queries. Step-by-step videos would be useful, instead of a book of instructions, because they're a new tool. They're now getting to the point where video training would be useful, or even live training. More digestible video instructions or opportunities for training, so that you actually learn hands-on, would help.
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

"Overall, we have seen about eighty-seven percent reduction of the number of vulnerabilities that require urgency to remediate, specifically the number of criticals."
"Zafran has become an indispensable tool in our cybersecurity arsenal."
"We saw benefits from Zafran Security almost immediately after deploying it."
"We are able to see the real risk of a vulnerability on our environment with our security tools."
"Zafran is an excellent tool."
"To be diligent for the customer, we usually go into Cybersixgill Investigative Portal to analyze and search things. The solution tells us the reputation of cyber threat actors. So, if someone has a reputation of one, it is a really bad idea to care about what that person is saying. However, if you find someone with a reputation of nine, then there is a high probability that we need to address the problem. You can get information about these type of actors in Cybersixgill Investigative Portal. They have a huge collection, which is like having the rules/goals of the dark web and deep web without having to go there. Our analysts avoid going dark web because they have Cybersixgill Investigative Portal and can get the news from their browser, searching wherever they want."
"They also provide some of the greatest notification capabilities. I put in a customer's company name and domain names, or sometimes I put in their IP addresses as a keyword. Once Sixgill collects information that includes those keywords, they then provide us email notifications. That means we can catch information related to our customers as soon as possible."
"The solution’s approach of using limited open source intelligence and focusing, instead, on the Deep Web and Dark Web is what seals the deal. That is why I like them. I have other tools that I can aggregate all the open source intelligence from. I value Cybersixgill because it provides access to things that no one else does."
"The advanced analysis has made our security operations more efficient. It has also potentially given us quicker access to data that we might not have otherwise located."
"The security alerts and correlated alerts are most valuable. It correlates the logs and gives us correlated alerts, which can be fed into any security information and event management (SIEM) tool. It is an analyzed correlation tool for monitoring security. It gives us alerts when there is any kind of unauthorized access, or when there is any malfunctioning in multifactor authentication (MFA). If our Azure is connected with Azure Security Center, we get to know what types of authentication are happening in our infra."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has made our environment more secure."
"I have not experienced any difficulties or issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud."
"The pricing is good."
"The most valuable feature is the regulatory compliance aspect, where we utilize predefined initiatives like NIST. Alert management is another useful feature. Alerts are directly integrated with our email or DevOps board for easy viewing, allowing us to identify problem areas efficiently."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"Defender for Cloud provides a prioritized list of remediations for security issues, reducing risk and improving security operations."
 

Cons

"I think the ability to have some enhanced reporting capabilities is something they can improve on, as they have good reports but we have asked for some specific reporting enhancements."
"Initially, we were somewhat concerned about the scalability of Zafran due to our large asset count and the substantial amount of information we needed to process."
"The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvements."
"The breadth of access to data is good, but there are gaps. More data would be my suggestion because the platform is good and I have no complaints about the system. I think it is just a case of always trying to get more data sources."
"Regarding their scraping abilities, things could be solidified. There are definitely improvements that could be made on the specificity for setting certain queries."
"Sixgill has strong capabilities based on search queries, but there is some difficulty in using Sixgill. Their querying is very powerful but it can be difficult. It's not hugely complex but you need some skill to use Sixgill querying."
"We need real-time updated information. If we could have this, it would be amazing. For example, if someone was posting something, then ten second later, it was on the platform. Sometimes, it takes a minute or hours right now, depending on the forum."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is not compatible with Linux machines."
"Sometimes it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or a special kind of product."
"The cost is always a concern, but overall, it's not too bad because it is easy to use and pretty friendly."
"The user interface of Microsoft Defender for Cloud, like many Microsoft portals, undergoes frequent changes and feature relocation."
"The solution's portal is very easy to use, but there's one key component that is missing when it comes to managing policies. For example, if I've onboarded my server and I need to specify antivirus policies, there's no option to do that on the portal. I will have to go to Intune to deploy them. That is one main aspect that is missing and it's worrisome."
"Azure Security Center takes a long time to update, compared to the on-premises version of Microsoft Defender."
"Defender is occasionally unreliable. It isn't 100% efficient in terms of antivirus detection, but it isn't an issue most of the time. It's also somewhat difficult to train new security analysts to use Defender."
"Azure's system could be more on point like AWS support. For example, if I have an issue with AWS, I create a support ticket, then I get a call or a message. With Azure support, you raise a ticket, and somebody calls back depending on their availability and the priority, which might not align with your business priority."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Sometimes, Cybersixgill Investigative Portal is cheaper than its competitors."
"The pricing and licensing are good. It is expensive for us because the US dollar is quite strong compared to our dollar. Otherwise, it is quite reasonable for what it is. All the tools in the market are around the same price from my experience."
"The pricing is cheap compared with Recorded Future. Sixgill's cost-effectiveness is very good."
"The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license."
"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters."
"Azure Defender is definitely pricey, but their competitors cost about the same. For example, a Palo Alto solution is the same price per endpoint, but the ground strikes cost a bit more than Azure Defender. Still, it's pricey for a company like ours. Maybe well-established organizations can afford it, but it might be too costly for a startup."
"The tool is pretty expensive."
"Currently, Microsoft offers only one plan at the enterprise level which is $15 per machine."
"Pricing depends on your workload size, but it is very cheap. If you're talking about virtual machines, it is $5 or something for each machine, which is minimal. If you go for some agent-based solution for every virtual machine, then you need to pay the same thing or more than that. For an on-premises solution like this, we were paying around $30 to $50 based on size. With Defender, Microsoft doesn't bother about the size. You pay based on the number of machines. So, if you have 10 virtual machines, and 10 virtual machines are being monitored, you are paying based on that rather than the size of the virtual machine. Thus, you are paying for the number of units rather than paying for the size of your units."
"Understanding the costs of cloud services can be complicated at first. As with a lot of things in the cloud, it can be quite hard to understand the end cost, but it becomes clearer over time. Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something. It is clever marketing, and there is room for improvement there. There should be clarity from the start."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Educational Organization
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zafran Security?
The current pricing of Zafran Security is fair overall. They were good to work with to accommodate our organization w...
What needs improvement with Zafran Security?
The dashboarding and reporting functionality of Zafran Security is an area that definitely could use some improvement...
What is your primary use case for Zafran Security?
Zafran Security is helping reduce the amount of critical vulnerabilities in our environments that require prompt reme...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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.
 

Also Known As

No data available
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
Current customers include large enterprises, financial services, manufacturing, GSIs, MSSPs, government and law enforcement entities.
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 Cybersixgill vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.