We performed a comparison between Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes and Symantec Data Center Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Container Security."PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"It's helped free up staff time so that they can work on other projects."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"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."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"Cloud Native Security's most valuable features include cloud misconfiguration detection and remediation, compliance monitoring, a robust authentication security engine, and cloud threat detection and response capabilities."
"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."
"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"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."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"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."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"It is easy to install and manage."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pros →
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console, which can handle different products that we have."
"Good file integrity monitoring features."
"We use the product to prevent unauthorized access to data, systems, and servers. It provides essential features for data center security."
"The most valuable feature is the endpoint protection system."
"The monitoring in the management console allows us to find out what is going wrong, and it gets reports even before the user reports it."
"The tool will then detect any anomalies, such as an intruder who has breached the network, which can trigger the system lockdown feature if it's enabled and meets the defined threshold."
"The ability to finely control permissions and restrictions on servers or assets through a customizable rule set is a key strength."
"The console and tools are very user-friendly."
"PingSafe takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"The main area for improvement I want to see is for the platform to become less resource-intensive. Right now, it can slow down processes on the machine, and it would be a massive improvement if it were more lightweight than it currently is."
"Some of the navigation and some aspects of the portal may be a little bit confusing."
"I would like additional integrations."
"Scanning capabilities should be added for the dark web."
"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."
"They can work on policies based on different compliance standards."
"Customized queries should be made easier to improve PingSafe."
"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 deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"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."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Cons →
"The product blocks certain processes, even after allowlisting them."
"The support is very bad. They're not fast at all. Trend Micro's support is much better."
"This solution clashes with Microsoft defender, which results in performance degradation on the machine."
"A user or administrator making the policy in the DCS should have a very thorough knowledge of the operating system or policy making. You have to be very specific about the data structure."
"There is room for improvement in enhancing its graphical user interface for a more user-friendly experience."
"Could have better reporting capabilities and better support."
"They need to develop a more flexible product that can be scaled such that it fits well into a small business or a bigger, enterprise-level solution."
"It would be advantageous if Symantec or Broadcom, given the rebranding, could simplify the process, enabling users to leverage the antivirus functionality more easily."
More SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Symantec Data Center Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is ranked 16th in Container Security with 10 reviews while Symantec Data Center Security is ranked 12th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 11 reviews. Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is rated 8.4, while Symantec Data Center Security is rated 7.6. 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 Symantec Data Center Security writes "A robust solution that provides comprehensive protection for data centers, offering agentless security, powerful intrusion prevention, and a wide range of security features". 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 BMC Helix Cloud Security, whereas Symantec Data Center Security is most compared with Trend Micro Deep Security, Symantec Endpoint Security, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Illumio.
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.