We performed a comparison between Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Container Security solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"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 technical support is good."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"Cloud Native Security helps us discover vulnerabilities in a cloud environment like open ports that allow people to attack our environment. If someone unintentionally opens a port, we are exposed. Cloud Native Security alerts us so we can remediate the problem. We can also automate it so that Cloud Native Security will fix it."
"Cloud Native Security has helped us with our risk posture and securing our agenda. It has been tremendous in terms of supporting growth."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"As a frequently audited company, we value PingSafe's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."
"Our previous product took a lot of man hours to manage. Once we got Singularity Cloud Workload Security, it freed up our time to work on other tasks."
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"It is pretty easy to integrate with this platform. When properly integrated, it monitors end-to-end."
"Cloud Native Security is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"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 solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"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."
"The solution's price could be better."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"We can customize security policies but lack auditing capabilities."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"If I had to pick a complaint, it would be the way the hosts are listed in the tool. You have different columns separated by endpoint name, Cloud Account, and Cloud Instances ID. I wish there was something where we could change the endpoint name and not use just the IP address. We would like to have custom names or our own names for the instances. If I had a complaint, that would be it, but so far, it meets all the needs that we have."
"We'd like to have better notifications. We'd like them to happen faster."
"PingSafe can improve by eliminating 100 percent of the false positives."
"In addition to our telecom and Slack channels, it would be helpful to receive Cloud Native Security security notifications in Microsoft Teams."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews while Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is ranked 6th in Container Security with 67 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes writes "Provides network mapping feature for visualizing container communication but complex setup ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne writes "Provides excellent workload telemetry, hunting capabilities, and deep visibility ". Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, SUSE NeuVector, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Sysdig Secure, whereas Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Orca Security, AWS GuardDuty and Qualys VMDR. See our Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne 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.
