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

Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Cymulate comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Cloud and Data Center Security (2nd), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (12th), Microsegmentation Software (2nd)
Cymulate
Ranking in Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Threat Intelligence Platforms (16th), Attack Surface Management (ASM) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) category, the mindshare of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is 0.5%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cymulate is 19.9%, up from 19.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS)
 

Featured Reviews

Matthias Kropf - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 16, 2024
The tool's most valuable feature is visibility but needs improvement in Kubernetes
We use the product in the production environment of server infrastructure.  The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility.  Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it.  I have been using the product since October.  We faced some minor issues, but overall, the product is stable. I…
Ondrej Kováč - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 28, 2024
Advanced cybersecurity solution for attack based vulnerability mng. and upskill platform for SOC.
While Cymulate's technology shows great promise and delivers excellent results, their approach to positioning the solution appears to overlap with other companies like Tenable, making them both direct and indirect competitors. Cymulate must refine their messaging and manage expectations effectively. In my experience, they need to be more attentive internally and mindful of potential negative impacts on customers. They exhibit a high degree of flexibility, which can result in sudden changes without adequate alerting. Communicating with them via phone for business matters can be challenging. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cymulate's technology level at eight, but their business level at four out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"That is primarily because I've seen increased rules. It's kind of caught us a little off guard. With GuardiCore, I have had to deal with their technical support and engineering team in Israel. They are amazing. They are very quick to adapt."
"The real bonus is the fact that we can secure applications, all the way down to the individual services, on each host. It's actually more granular security than we can get out of a traditional firewall."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its visibility."
"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."
"The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"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 most valuable feature for us is the zero-day."
"The reporting capabilities are very good."
"Cymulate is easy to set up, install, and configure."
 

Cons

"It would be very helpful for beginners if the solution had more windows to help with the terms inside instead of going to the documentation."
"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."
"Incident tagging could be improved. Other vendors offer semi-automatic tagging, which Guardicore doesn't yet have."
"In our version, when using the terminal server, we cannot exclude user tasks for each session."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"The dashboard needs improvement. It should be more flexible so that I can easily see what I want or need to see."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"Clients would like to see that the security policies of GuardiCore can continue to be comparable to all the major firewall players out there."
"The cost can be quite high, and it impacts scalability as more simulations require additional expenses."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Guardicore Centra provides better value for money than NSX, was the other solution that we looked at, which was too expensive for what it does."
"GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
"The solution is reasonably priced and I would rate it a six out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is expensive."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"The pricing is too high."
"This is not a cheap solution but you have to consider the bigger picture, which is what it is giving you."
"The customer would complain about the cost."
"Cymulate's services are expensive."
"The product is affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) solutions are best for your needs.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Guardicore Centra?
Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Guardicore Centra?
I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. I know other micro-segmentation tools like Cisco or Illumio, and so I think they are in the middle.
What needs improvement with Guardicore Centra?
Customers would want to see the cost improved.
What do you like most about Cymulate?
The most valuable feature for us is the zero-day.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cymulate?
The pricing for Cymulate could be better. If I were to rate it, it would be a six out of ten.
What needs improvement with Cymulate?
The main area for improvement in Cymulate is its pricing. The cost can be quite high, and it impacts scalability as more simulations require additional expenses.
 

Also Known As

Guardicore Centra, GuardiCore
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Santander, Frontier Airlines, OpenLink, Intermountain Healthcare, Cellcom, BancoBASE
Euronext, YMCA, Telit, Nemours 
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Cymulate and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
815,854 professionals have used our research since 2012.