Lacework FortiCNAPP vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes comparison

Fortinet and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Security category. Fortinet is ranked #23 with an average rating of 8.7, while Red Hat is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.1. Fortinet holds a 1.7% mindshare in Container Security, compared to Red Hat’s 2.4% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of Fortinet users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Lacework FortiCNAPP

Read 10 Lacework FortiCNAPP reviews

2,484 Views
111 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...

Read 12 Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes reviews

2,664 Views
610 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Lacework FortiCNAPP

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 16, 2025

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Lacework FortiCNAPP compete in the Kubernetes security sector. Red Hat is preferred for its support and pricing, while Lacework is favored for its comprehensive feature set.

Features: Red Hat provides vulnerability management, compliance checks, and risk assessments, with strong integration in Kubernetes environments. Lacework offers workload visibility, threat detection, and behavioral anomaly detection, broadening security analytics beyond Kubernetes.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat could improve by enhancing its security analytics and expanding feature breadth to match competitors. Its scalability in non-Kubernetes environments may also require enhancement. For Lacework, noise reduction in alerts and providing more detailed configuration options could be beneficial. Developing a more user-friendly interface and enhancing its Kubernetes-specific features would also be advantageous.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat offers streamlined deployment with robust support channels, simplifying Kubernetes cluster management. Its structured support simplifies user interaction. Lacework provides flexible deployment options and detailed customer support, helping users integrate the solution into various environments with adaptable customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat provides competitive pricing and a strong ROI, catering to businesses seeking cost-effective Kubernetes security. Lacework's pricing is higher but promises significant returns through its expansive features. Red Hat focuses on budget-friendliness, while Lacework emphasizes returns from its functionality.

To learn more, read our detailed Lacework FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Lacework FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 856,873 peers since 2012

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

Lacework FortiCNAPP

Ranking in Container Security

23rd

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vulnerability Management (25th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (14th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (20th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (15th), Compliance Management (8th)

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...

Ranking in Container Security

14th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Lacework FortiCNAPP is 1.7%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.4%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Container Security

Featured Reviews

Carlos Vitrano

Cloud security director at Medallia

Provides quick visibility and significantly reduces alerts

Its integrations with third-party SIEMs can be better. That is one of the things that we discussed with them. We have integrations, for instance, with Splunk. The data that we are receiving in Splunk is huge, and it is valid because Lacework has a bunch of data that they can provide to you. However, to be able to import the data and create alerts, we needed to do some work, so integration is one of the things that they can improve. For container security, how they scan images and how they provide results is something that they need to continue improving in terms of visibility. We already have visibility to several artifacts, but they can take that to the next level and see what else they can do. There can be better integrations with CI/CD pipelines. There can be improvements in terms of how we can take action or how we can report from the number of inventories they are providing to us.

Read full review

Daniel Stevens

Software Engineer at Galley

Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve

I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The compliance reports are definitely most valuable because they save time and are accurate. So, instead of relying on a human going through and checking or providing me with a report, I could just log into Lacework and see for myself."

"The best feature, in my opinion, is the ease of use."

"For the most part, out-of-the-box, it tells you right away about the things you need to work on. I like the fact that it prioritizes alerts based on severity, so that you can focus your efforts on anything that would be critical/high first, moderate second, and work your way down, trying to continue to improve your security posture."

"Lacework is helping a lot in reducing the noise of the alerts. Usually, whenever you have a tool in place, you have a lot of noise in terms of alerts, but the time for an engineer to look into those alerts is limited. Lacework is helping us to consolidate the information that we are getting from the agents and other sources. We are able to focus only on the things that matter, which is the most valuable thing for us. It saves time, and for investigations, we have the right context to take action."

"I find the cloud configuration compliance scanning mature. It generates a lot of data and supports major frameworks like ISO 27001 or SOC 2, providing reports and datasets. Another feature I appreciate is setting custom alerts for specific events. Additionally, I value the agent-based monitoring and scanning for compute nodes. It gives us deeper insights into our workloads and helps identify vulnerabilities across our deployed assets."

"The most valuable aspects are identifying vulnerabilities—things that are out there that we aren't aware of—as well as finding what path of access attackers could use, and being able to see open SSL or S3 buckets and the like."

"The most valuable feature, from a compliance perspective, is the ability to use Lacework as a platform for multiple compliance standards. We have to meet multiple standards like PCI, SOC 2, CIS, and whatever else is out there. The ability to have reports generated, per security standard, is one of the best features for me."

"The most valuable feature is Lacework's ability to distill all the security and audit logs. I recommend it to my customers. Normally, when I consult for other customers that are getting into the cloud, we use native security tools. It's more of a rule-based engine."

More Lacework FortiCNAPP pros

"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."

"The technical support is good."

"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."

"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."

"Offers easy management with authentication and authorization features"

"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."

"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."

More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes pros

Cons

"A feature that I have requested from them is the ability to sort alerts and policies based on a security framework. Right now, when you go into alerts, you have hundreds and hundreds of them that you have to manually pick. It would be useful to have categories for CIS Benchmark or SOC 2 and be able to display all the alerts and policies for one security framework."

"Lacework lacks remediation features, but I believe they're working on that. They're focused on the reporting aspect, but other features need to improve. They're also adding some compliance features, so it's not worth saying they need to get better at it."

"There are a couple of the difficulties we encounter in the realm of cybersecurity, or security as a whole, that relate to potentially limited clarity. Having the capacity to perceive the configuration aspect and having the ability to contribute to it holds substantial advantages, in my view. It ranks high, primarily due to its role in guaranteeing compliance and the potential to uncover vulnerabilities, which could infiltrate the system and introduce potential risks. I had been exploring a specific feature that captured my interest. However, just yesterday, I participated in a product update session that announced the imminent arrival of this feature. The feature involves real-time alerting. This was something I had been anticipating, and it seems that this capability is now being integrated, possibly as part of threat intelligence. While anomaly events consistently and promptly appear in the console, certain alerts tend to experience delays before being displayed. Yet, with the recent product update, this issue is expected to be resolved. Currently, a comprehensive view of all policies is available within the console. However, I want a more tailored display of my compliance posture, focusing specifically on policies relevant to me. For instance, if I'm not subject to HIPAA regulations, I'd prefer not to see the HIPAA compliance details. It's worth noting that even with this request, there exists a filtering mechanism to control the type of compliance information visible. This flexibility provides a workaround to my preference, which is why it's challenging for me to definitively state my exact request."

"I would like to see a remote access assistance feature. And the threat-hunting platform could be better."

"The biggest thing I would like to see improved is for them to pursue and obtain a FedRAMP moderate authorization... I don't believe they have any immediate plans to get FedRAMP moderate authorized, which is a bit of a challenge for us because we can only use Lacework in our commercial environment."

"The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modules is structured differently, complicating correlation efforts. Consequently, I had to create extensive custom reports outside Lacework because their default dashboards didn't communicate risk metrics. They're addressing these issues by redesigning their tools, including introducing the dashboard, which is a step closer to actionable insights but still needs refinement."

"Visibility is lacking, and both compliance-related metrics and IAM security control could be improved."

"Lacework has not reduced the number of alerts we get. We've actually had to add resources as a result of using it because the application requires a lot of people to understand it to get the value out of it properly."

More Lacework FortiCNAPP cons

"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."

"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."

"The solution's price could be better."

"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."

"I do see that some features associated with the IAST part are not included in the tool, making it an area where improvements are required."

"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."

"The support and specifications need to be up to date for the cluster technologies"

"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."

More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing has gotten better. That scenario was somewhat unstable. They have a rather interesting licensing structure. I believe you get 200 resources per "Lacework unit." It was difficult, in the beginning, to figure out exactly what a "resource" was... That was a problem until about a year or so ago. They have improved it and it has stabilized quite a bit."

"The licensing fee was approximately $80,000 USD, per year."

"My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz."

"It is slightly expensive. It depends on how big your environment is, but it is expensive. Right now, we are spending a lot of money. We have covered all of the cloud providers and most of our colocation facilities as well, so we cannot complain, but it is slightly expensive. It is not super expensive."

"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."

"It's a costly solution"

"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."

"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."

"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

University

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Lacework?

Polygraph compliance is a valuable feature. In our perspective, it delivers significant benefits. The clarity it offers, along with the ability to identify and address misconfigurations, is invalua...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Lacework?

My smaller deployments cost around 200,000 a year, which is probably not as expensive as Wiz.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Lacework?

The solution lacks a cohesive data model, making extracting the necessary data from the platform challenging. It uses its own LQL query language, and each database across different layers and modul...

See all answers

What do you like most about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?

I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?

From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for the prevention part, but currently, we need to do it manually. I hear that Palo Al...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?

I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling, and everything else.

See all answers

Comparisons

Wiz vs Lacework FortiCNAPP

Compared 21% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Lacework FortiCNAPP

Compared 17% of the time

AWS GuardDuty vs Lacework FortiCNAPP

Compared 6% of the time

Tenable Cloud Security vs Lacework FortiCNAPP

Compared 5% of the time

More Lacework FortiCNAPP Competitors

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 23% of the time

SUSE NeuVector vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 12% of the time

CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 9% of the time

Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 8% of the time

Sysdig Secure vs Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Compared 6% of the time

More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Lacework FortiCNAPP

June 2025

Download Lacework FortiCNAPP product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

May 2025

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes report

Download Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes product report

Also Known As

Polygraph, FortiCNP

StackRox

Overview

Lacework FortiCNAPP provides robust cloud security, combining vulnerability management and multi-cloud insight with user-friendly controls, machine learning detection, and compliance support.

Lacework FortiCNAPP specializes in cloud security by merging machine learning anomaly detection with agent-based vulnerability management to offer detailed alerts and compliance reports. Its comprehensive approach allows continuous monitoring across AWS and Kubernetes, providing insights from an attacker's perspective. The platform offers automation and seamless Slack integration, facilitating collaborative and efficient cloud security management. Users value its ability to handle multi-cloud environments and scan IAC scripts, configurations, and compute nodes across AWS and GCP.

What are the key features?

Machine Learning Detection: Identifies anomalies effectively.
Compliance Reports: Provides precise compliance documentation.
Vulnerability Management: Supports agent-based vulnerability assessments.
Multi-Cloud Support: Manages and secures across multiple cloud providers.
Automation and Collaboration: Enables integration with Slack for streamlined communication.
Custom Alerts: Allows creation of personalized alerts for better focus.

What benefits do users expect?

Reduced Alert Noise: Minimizes distractions with filtered alerts.
Efficient Cloud Security: Automates processes for enhanced security management.
Collaboration Support: Integrates with tools like Slack.
Insightful Perspective: Provides insight from an attacker's viewpoint.

Organizations across sectors leverage Lacework FortiCNAPP for cloud security, focusing on compliance, security posture, and vulnerability management. It is widely used for monitoring AWS and Kubernetes environments, scanning IAC scripts, configurations, and securing compute nodes. It supports multi-cloud security posture management and log ingestion, enabling companies to maintain strong cloud infrastructures without dedicated security layers.

Fortinet

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is a Kubernetes-native container security solution that enables your organization to more securely build, deploy, and run cloud-native applications from anywhere. With its built-in security across the entire software development life cycle, you can lower your operational costs, reduce operational risk, and increase developer productivity while improving your security posture immediately. In addition, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security integrates with security tools and DevOps in an effort to help you mitigate threats and enforce security policies that minimize operational risk to your applications. It also enables you to provide developers with actionable, context-rich guidelines integrated into existing workflows, along with tooling to support developer productivity. The solution is suitable for small, medium, and large-sized companies.

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Features

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

Vulnerability management: With the Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes solution, you gain full visibility into your entire cloud-native landscape. The solution makes it possible for your organization to identify and remediate vulnerabilities in Kubernetes configurations and container images, as well as running applications. It also enables you to provide developers with clear and prioritized guidance on fixable vulnerabilities.

Configuration management: The solution makes configuration management easy. To identify missed best practices, you can understand how images, containers, and deployments are configured prior to running. It also allows you to leverage Kubernetes-native capabilities - like admission controllers - to prevent misconfigured workloads from deploying or running.

Compliance: Using Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes helps you manage compliance with standard-specific checks across CIS Benchmarks, NIST, PCI, and HIPAA, with more than 300 controls and continuous compliance assessments and one-click audit reporting.

Network segmentation: The solution enables you to enforce network policies by using the native capabilities in Kubernetes. You can simulate new policies, visualize existing ones, generate updated YAML files, and apply them directly to Kubernetes.

Multifactor risk profiling: With Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, you can use risk rankings by combining vulnerability (CVE) details with rich Kubernetes context and artifact data. This allows you to assess and prioritize risk across your entire environment. In turn, you can accelerate remediation times and productivity.

Threat detection and incident response: By combining custom policies, process allow lists, application and network baselines, and behavioral modeling to identify anomalous behavior, the solution enables you to protect your applications at runtime. You can then leverage Kubernetes-native enforcement capabilities to respond.

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Benefits

There are many benefits to implementing Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. Some of the biggest advantages the solution offers include:

Increases protection, scalability, and portability.
Eliminates blind spots.
Reduces time and costs.
Reduces the effort needed to implement security.
Streamlines security analysis, investigation, and remediation by using the rich context Kubernetes provides.
Provides scalability and resiliency native to Kubernetes

Reviews from Real Users

PeerSpot user Igor K., Owner/Full Stack Software Engineer at Maraphonic, Inc., says, “The solution allows teams to create their own virtual spaces and share resources. The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources.”

Red Hat

Sample Customers

J.Crew, AdRoll, Snowflake, VMWare, Iterable, Pure Storage, TrueCar, NerdWallet, and more.

City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Buyer's Guide

Lacework FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

June 2025

Free Report: Lacework FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes

Find out what your peers are saying about Lacework FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Lacework FortiCNAPP vs. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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.