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

Imperva Data Security vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

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

Imperva Data Security
Ranking in Data Security Posture Management (DSPM)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Data Security Posture Management (DSPM)
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
75
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), Microsoft Security Suite (4th), Compliance Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) category, the mindshare of Imperva Data Security is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 12.7%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Security Posture Management (DSPM)
 

Featured Reviews

Samuel Adeyemi - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time data monitoring and policy-based activity blocking enhance security and awareness
The development mode on the platform needs improvement. For example, the archiving functionalities should be enhanced to allow easy conversion of archived logs into CSV or Excel formats for data analysis. When I need to investigate with archived data, the inability to export to these formats can be limiting. Making this process easier would be beneficial for reviews.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"If something malicious occurs, I can set a policy to block it, review the action, and decide whether to release it if it's found not to be malicious."
"The benefits are operational. The outcome comes from preventing an attack on the organization. On the operational side, you generally have good, decent security measures for your application, database, and digital assets."
"The most valuable features include a great level of automation, machine learning for attack validation, and a very flexible and comfortable management console."
"I recommend the product to other users."
"The time to detect vulnerabilities has gotten a lot quicker."
"It offers virus management and addresses threats such as viruses, worms, spyware, and other critical security concerns."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"The most valuable features offer the latest threat detection and response capabilities."
"The product has given us more insight into potential avenues for attack paths."
"One of the features that I like about the solution is it is both a hybrid cloud and also multi-cloud. We never know what company we're going to buy, and therefore we are ready to go. If they have GCP or AWS, we have support for that as well. It offers a single-panel blast across multiple clouds."
"I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a nine out of 10."
"Some of the most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Cloud include its effectiveness in threat detection through unsupervised machine learning, CTI, and advanced sandboxing."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has made our environment more secure."
 

Cons

"The development mode on the platform needs improvement."
"The deployment is not easy."
"The development mode on the platform needs improvement. For example, the archiving functionalities should be enhanced to allow easy conversion of archived logs into CSV or Excel formats for data analysis."
"Imperva Data Security needs to improve first-level support."
"One area for improvement is the inclusion of a load balancer in on-premises solutions."
"There are challenges with the licensing policies, which are quite complicated."
"Sometimes it's very difficult to determine when I need Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a special resource group or a special kind of product."
"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."
"Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something."
"Microsoft Defender could be more centralized. For example, I still need to go to another console to do policy management."
"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."
"They could always work to make the pricing a bit lower."
"Features like code scanning and pipeline scanning are not included in the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is reasonably good in South Africa."
"Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products."
"The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license."
"The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against the importance of what needs covering."
"The cost of the license is based on the subscriptions that you have."
"Microsoft's licensing and pricing are sometimes complicated. If someone is new to Microsoft's licensing, they might have difficulty with it."
"Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"The cost is fair. There aren't any costs in addition to the standard licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
University
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Imperva Data Security?
The price is high, but it is not as high as competitors like IBM, Guardian, and Oracle. It cannot be considered low-priced.
What needs improvement with Imperva Data Security?
The development mode on the platform needs improvement. For example, the archiving functionalities should be enhanced to allow easy conversion of archived logs into CSV or Excel formats for data an...
What is your primary use case for Imperva Data Security?
We onboard databases with Imperva Data Security. I can put its policies around the environment I want to monitor. I can see it actually works if I want to prevent certain activities.
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 across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a...
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?
Initially, the cost was reasonable, but additional services from Microsoft sometimes incur extra expenses that seem higher than expected.
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

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.
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva Data Security vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.