We performed a comparison between Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Cymulate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy and found that they really stood out from other vendors. It allows us to see microsegmentation as distributed services."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"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 solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"The reporting capabilities are very good."
"The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"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."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"They can maybe improve their customer service just because they are kind of a small organization, and customer service isn't as big as others such as VMware."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"Supports become difficult when it's for a big organization. For a small organization, medium organization, it still makes sense, however, for a big organization, it makes life difficult."
"The reporting process requires significant improvement as it often takes longer than expected and the quality is lacking."
"The product must provide consultancy for initial setup."
More Akamai Guardicore Segmentation Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is ranked 4th in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 17 reviews while Cymulate is ranked 2nd in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) with 2 reviews. Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is rated 8.2, while Cymulate is rated 9.0. 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 Cymulate writes "An affordable solution that improves an organization’s security posture and provides excellent reporting capabilities". 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 Cymulate is most compared with Pentera, Picus Security, XM Cyber, SafeBreach and Rapid7 Penetration Testing Services. See our Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Cymulate report.
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.