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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Sangfor Endpoint Secure comparison

Sponsored
 

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
113
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (9th), Container Security (4th), 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)
Sangfor Endpoint Secure
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR)
 

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.
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.
Shiraz Ali - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides a unified and multi-layer security solution
I believe Sangfor Endpoint Secure could improve in terms of its user interface and management capabilities. Having a single, more user-friendly management console, like a one-window approach, would streamline the user experience and make it easier for administrators to handle security tasks more efficiently. Sangfor Endpoint Secure currently only allows one manager to control clients, and it lacks a backup system. It would be better if it supported a secondary manager for backup in case the primary one fails, ensuring uninterrupted service.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They're responsive to feature requests. If I suggest a feature for Prisma, I will need to wait until the next release on their roadmap. Cloud Native Security will add it right away."
"I did a lot of research before signing up and doing the demo. They have a good reputation as far as catching threats early on."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"The real-time detection and response capabilities overall are great."
"My favorite feature is Storyline."
"The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best features."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's most valuable feature is its unified console."
"Its performance impact on the systems is low, which means there is a minimal impact on system performance compared to traditional antivirus solutions."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"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."
"It's quite a good product. It helps to understand the infections and issues you are facing."
"It alerts us to our vulnerabilities and ensures compliance by marking off a compliance tool checklist."
"I've seen benefits since implementing Microsoft Defender for Cloud. It's easy to manage for our large organization as an endpoint security solution. It integrates well with Office 365 and Windows 11, which is better than before. Patching, updates, and threat protection are all handled together now. Its AI features help predict threats."
"The most valuable features are the security recommendations provided by Defender for Cloud."
"The vulnerability reporting is helpful. When we initially deployed Defender, it reported many more threats than we currently see. It gave us insight into areas we had not previously considered, so we knew where we needed to act."
"Defender is a robust platform for dealing with many kinds of threats. We're protected from various threats, like viruses. Attacks can be easily minimized with this solution defending our infrastructure."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates."
"What stands out to me is the dual-end user interface they provide."
"The most valuable feature I have found in the system is its comprehensive end-to-end protection."
"We use the product for network protection from any malicious threat."
"The tool's AI feature is helpful in endpoint security."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The tool's most valuable features are control access, endpoint security, and load balancing of ISPs."
"The real-time monitoring feature of Sangfor Endpoint Secure is truly real-time, with no delay compared to other solutions."
 

Cons

"In terms of ease of use, initially, it is a bit confusing to navigate around, but once you get used to it, it becomes easier."
"The integration with Oracle has room for improvement."
"They need more experienced support personnel."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's current documentation could be improved to better assist customers during the cluster onboarding process."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security has limited legacy system support and may not fully support older operating systems or legacy environments."
"Currently, we would have to export our vulnerability report to an .xlsx file, and review it in an Excel spreadsheet, and then we sort of compile a list from there. It would be cool if there was a way to actually toggle multiple applications for review and then see those file paths on multiple users rather than only one user at a time or only one application at a time."
"I want SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"The application module focuses on the different codes and libraries that can be run on the machines. It is very important for Singularity EDR to detect what type of codes and what type of libraries can run in the machine. If they can implement a white list or a black list of codes or libraries that can be used in the machine, it would be very helpful. They can focus more on the application module."
"However, some Copilot features aren't available in the GCP environment. This is something we hope will be addressed in the future."
"I recommend that they extend the scope for legacy infra assets."
"For Kubernetes, I was using Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS). To see that whatever is getting deployed into AKS goes through the correct checks and balances in terms of affinities and other similar aspects and follows all the policies, we had to use a product called Stackrox. At a granular level, the built-in policies were good for Kubernetes, but to protect our containers from a coding point of view, we had to use a few other products. For example, from a programming point of view, we were using Checkmarx for static code analysis. For CIS compliance, there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, we had to use other plugins to see that the CIS benchmarks are compliant. There are CIS benchmarks for Kubernetes on AWS and GCP, but there are no CIS benchmarks for AKS. So, Azure Security Center fell short from the regulatory compliance point of view, and we had to use one more product. We ended up with two different dashboards. We had Azure Security Center, and we had Stackrox that had its own dashboard. The operations team and the security team had to look at two dashboards, and they couldn't get an integrated piece. That's a drawback of Azure Security Center. Azure Security Center should provide APIs so that we can integrate its dashboard within other enterprise dashboards, such as the PowerBI dashboard. We couldn't get through these aspects, and we ended up giving Reader security permission to too many people, which was okay to some extent, but when we had to administer the users for the Stackrox portal and Azure Security Center, it became painful."
"I would like to see better automation when it comes to pushing out security features to the recommendations, and better documentation on the step-by-step procedures for enabling certain features."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters. It could be cheaper."
"With the new Copilot functionality available everywhere, it is challenging to pinpoint areas for improvement. If I put in a lot of thought, I might identify things, but right now, nothing significant pops into my mind, but there is always room for more transparency, especially in pricing."
"From my own perspective, they just need a product that is tailored to micro-segmentation so I can configure rules for multiple systems at once and manage it."
"The vulnerabilities are duplicated many times."
"Sometimes, the VPN is not secure and doesn't work properly in Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"I face issues while migrating from Kaspersky to Sangfor Endpoint Secure."
"It is complicated to establish a tunnel due to technical issues in the VPN system."
"Currently, the tool lacks reporting functionalities."
"When an issue occurs, the response time for first-level support and the time taken for meetings could be improved."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure performs poorly."
"The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure should include healing capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe is affordable."
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"It's a fair price for what you get. We are happy with the price as it stands."
"The pricing is somewhat high compared to other market tools."
"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is cost-efficient."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"The pricing tends to be high."
"The pricing model for most plans is generally good, but the cost of the new Defender for Storage plan is high and should be revisited, as it could lead to disabling desirable security features due to cost."
"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."
"Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
"I am not involved in this area. However, I believe its price is okay because even small customers are using Azure Security Center. I don't think it is very expensive."
"The solution is expensive, and I rate it a five to six out of ten."
"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."
"We are using the free version of the Azure Security Center."
"Its "pay as you grow" model offers cost-effectiveness compared to major cloud providers."
"The solution is cheap. It is cheaper than other products by 15-20 percent."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure's pricing is cheap. I rate it seven out of ten."
"We were using Hyper-V. So, we switched to Sangfor because of the pricing."
"Sangfor Endpoint Secure is not a cheap solution."
"Price-wise, Sangfor Endpoint Secure can be considered a competitively priced product in the market as it offers quite low prices compared to other solutions."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions are best for your needs.
850,043 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%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
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...
What do you like most about Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure has some good policy certificates.
What needs improvement with Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
The interface has too many buttons, making it cluttered. It would be better if it were a simplified version with fewe...
What is your primary use case for Sangfor Endpoint Secure?
Sangfor Endpoint Secure is easy to handle with its user-friendly interface. The four engines it utilizes for endpoint...
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Wiz, Microsoft, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP). Updated: April 2025.
850,043 professionals have used our research since 2012.