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

CoreOS Clair vs Tenable.io Container Security comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

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
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (2nd)
CoreOS Clair
Ranking in Container Security
27th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tenable.io Container Security
Ranking in Container Security
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CoreOS Clair is 0.5%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tenable.io Container Security is 1.1%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

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.
Felipe Giffu - PeerSpot reviewer
An operational system, similar to Linux where you can run your applications inside containers
With CoreOS, you can run your applications inside containers. For example, if you have an application that needs to run on Linux, you can create and install a container. However, it's important to note that you don't install CoreOS inside a container; CoreOS is the host operating system that manages containers. When you mentioned using Nacula as part of your CI/CD pipeline, it means your application is deployed and managed automatically through the CI/CD process. Containers are used to deploy your application within this pipeline, but CoreOS does not run inside these containers. Instead, CoreOS is the base operating system that supports and manages these containers.
Yusuf-Hashmi - PeerSpot reviewer
It helps you catch misconfigurations before they go into a production environment where they're harder to deal with
They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed. Asset visibility is also critical. While Tenable provides visibility into containers, it could be done much better. Compliance is one of the most crucial aspects of container security. It should be more customizable. For example, I would like a rating system where Tenable reports a risk score for each container based on user-defined metrics, such as severity, activity, or compliance.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"My favorite feature is Storyline."
"The user-friendliness is the most valuable feature."
"Support has been very helpful and provides regular feedback and help whenever needed. They've been very useful."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"The user interface is well-designed and easy to navigate."
"It's positively affected the communication between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams."
"It integrates very well. We sell different products from different vendors. We know that the SentinelOne Singularity platform can be integrated with several different solutions from different vendors."
"The best features we value in SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security include compliance monitoring features, as we are a frequently audited company. They provide reports with compliance scores, showing how well we meet certain regulatory standards, such as HIPAA, and we can show our compliance as a percentage."
"With CoreOS, you can run your applications inside containers. For example, if you have an application that needs to run on Linux, you can create and install a container. However, it's important to note that you don't install CoreOS inside a container; CoreOS is the host operating system that manages containers."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"Currently, I haven't implemented the solution due to its deprecation by the site. However, I can highlight some benefits of Tenable Cloud Security, a cybersecurity solution with various features for scanning vulnerabilities in both cloud environments and on-premises container security."
"Nessus scanner is very effective for internal penetration testing."
"The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting."
"The solution shows you the exploitable vulnerabilities and helps you prioritize."
"Tenable.io detects misconfiguration when you deploy a Docker or Kubernetes container. It's much better to remedy these issues during deployment instead of waiting until the container is already in the production environment."
"It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, it is a good solution."
"The strong security provided by the product in the container environment is its most valuable feature."
"It helps us secure our applications from the build phase and identify the weaknesses from scratch."
 

Cons

"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"While PingSafe offers real-time response, there is room for improvement in alert accuracy."
"In version 2, a lot of rules have been deployed for Kubernetes security and CDR, which makes a lot of issues of critical severity, whereas they are not critical or of high severity. There is a mismatch of severities."
"PingSafe filtering has some areas that cause problems, and to achieve single sign-on functionality, a break-glass feature, which is currently unavailable, is necessary."
"In addition to our telecom and Slack channels, it would be helpful to receive Cloud Native Security security notifications in Microsoft Teams."
"Whenever I view the processes and the process aspect, it takes a long time to load."
"We had a glitch in PingSafe where it fed us false positives in the past."
"Sometimes the Storyline ID is a bit wacky."
"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
"It can be improved in its support response. They usually take up to seven days to resolve the issue."
"The stability and setup phase of the product are areas with shortcomings where improvements are needed."
"I feel that in certain areas this product has false positives which the company should work on. They should also try to include business logic vulnerabilities in the scanner testing. Finally, the vulnerability assessment feature should be increased to other hardware devices, apart from firewalls."
"Tenable.io Container Security should improve integration modules. It should also improve stability."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"I believe integration plays a crucial role for Tenable, particularly in terms of connecting with other products and various container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. It seems that in future updates, enhanced integration is something I would appreciate. Currently, there is integration with Docker, but when it comes to Kubernetes or other container solutions, it appears to be a challenge, especially with on-prem scanners."
"They need to work on auto-remediation so it's easier for the security team to act quickly when certain assets or resources are deployed. The latest version has a CIS benchmark that you need to meet for containers in the cloud, but more automation is needed."
"The support is tricky to reach, so we would like better-oriented technical support enabled."
"The initial setup is highly complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price depends on the extension of the solution that you want to buy. If you want to buy just EDR, the price is less. XDR is a little bit more expensive. There are going to be different add-ons for Singularity."
"Their pricing appears to be based simply on the number of accounts we have, which is common for cloud-based products."
"PingSafe falls within the typical price range for cloud security platforms."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"For pricing, it currently seems to be in line with market rates."
"PingSafe's pricing is good because it provides us with a solution."
"CoreOS Clair is open-source and free of charge."
"The product does not operate on a pay-per-license model."
"It's best to be an institutional buyer and directly contact the sales team as they can provide over-the-top discounts for bulk orders."
"I rate the product’s pricing a six out of ten."
"I rate the tool's pricing a three out of ten."
"The solution's pricing is neither cheap nor very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 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
5%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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?
The documentation could be better. Besides improving the documentation, obtaining a professional or partner specializ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CoreOS Clair?
If you work with CoreOS or OpenShift, you don't need to pay for CoreOS separately. When you pay for OpenShift, you ge...
What needs improvement with CoreOS Clair?
It can be improved in its support response. They usually take up to seven days to resolve the issue.
What is your primary use case for CoreOS Clair?
We use the tool to manage and secure the event file system. CoreOS Clair is an operational system that is very simila...
What do you like most about Tenable.io Container Security?
The tool's most valuable feature is scanning, reporting, and troubleshooting.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
No data available
Tenable FlawCheck, FlawCheck
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
eBay, Veritas, Verizon, SalesForce
ServiceMaster
Find out what your peers are saying about CoreOS Clair vs. Tenable.io Container Security and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.