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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Trivy comparison

Sponsored
 

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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (3rd)
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (9th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (4th), Compliance Management (2nd)
Trivy
Ranking in Container Security
19th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 7.4%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Trivy is 4.8%, up from 0.1% 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.
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.
Utsav Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Maintain operational efficiency by detecting misconfigurations and vulnerabilities
The vulnerability scanning feature is excellent as it supports various container capabilities like Docker and Sharma. It also offers repository scanning in the source code domain, allowing pre-push code scans. The misconfiguration detection works well for CloudFormation, Docker files, and Terraform. Its compliance support, like NIST, ensures that configurations align with standards. Trivy helps me significantly detect misconfigurations missed by the ops engineers or in Terraform by the naked eye. It ensures that my deployments are free of misconfigurations and vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers several valuable features, most notably the rapid vulnerability notifications that provide timely alerts regarding our infrastructure."
"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"When creating cloud infrastructure, Cloud Native Security evaluates the cloud security parameters and how they will impact the organization's risk. It lets us know whether our security parameter conforms to international industry standards. It alerts us about anything that increases our risk, so we can address those vulnerabilities and prevent attacks."
"The most valuable features are automated threat response, AI detection, and static and dynamic detection."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
"The Offensive Security Engine, powered by impressive AI/ML capabilities, seamlessly integrates with cloud infrastructure to analyze data and provide optimal security solutions."
"PingSafe stands out for its user-friendly interface and intuitive software, making it easy to navigate and use."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to detect vulnerabilities inside AWS resources and its ability to rescan after a specific duration set by the administrator."
"Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud has improved our security poster by at least 100 percent."
"I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a nine out of 10."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the vulnerability assessments and the glossary of compliance."
"The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"The solution is up-to-date with the latest updates and identified threats."
"Threat protection is comprehensive and simple."
"Trivy is easy to integrate with CI/CD and can be installed on desktops to scan images."
"Overall, I would rate Trivy a ten out of ten."
"Trivy is easy to integrate with CI/CD and can be installed on desktops to scan images."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"I rate Trivy a nine out of ten."
"It's customizable, allowing me to add any rules and format HTML templates as I wish."
"I can see vulnerabilities in the images of any applications deployed in the Kubernetes environment or as container applications."
"I appreciate Trivy for being open-source and not requiring any payment."
 

Cons

"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 recently adopted a new ticket management solution, so we've asked them to include a connector to integrate that tool with Cloud Native Security directly. We'd also like to see Cloud Native Security add a scan for personally identifying information. We're looking at other tools for this capability, but having that functionality built into Cloud Native Security would be nice. Monitoring PII data is critical to us as an organization."
"I export CSV. I cannot export graphs. Restricting it to the CSV format has its own disadvantages. These are all machine IP addresses and information. I cannot change it to the JSON format. The export functionality can be improved."
"The reporting works well, but sometimes the severity classifications are inaccurate. Sometimes, it flags an issue as high-impact, but it should be a lower severity."
"The documentation that I use for the initial setup can be more detailed or written in a more user-friendly language to avoid troubles."
"The SentinelOne customer support needs improvement, as they are sometimes late in responding, which is critical in a production issue."
"Once all components, including the cloud piece and container runtime piece, integrate further and incorporate an AI layer for better comprehension, it will greatly enhance the utility of Singularity Cloud Security."
"The Kubernetes scanning on the Oracle Cloud needs to be improved. It's on the roadmap. AWS has this capability, but it's unavailable for Oracle Cloud."
"My experience with Microsoft Defender for Cloud has been largely negative due to a poor user experience."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It gets better once you're escalated past the first and second levels. It's difficult to get the necessary support when tickets are first opened."
"With the new Copilot functionality available everywhere, it is challenging to pinpoint areas for improvement. If I put in a lot of thought, I might identify things, but right now, nothing significant pops into my mind, but there is always room for more transparency, especially in pricing."
"Customizing some of the compliance requirements based on individual needs seems like the biggest area of improvement. There should be an option to turn specific controls on and off based on how your solution is configured."
"Integration into other third-party products, particularly those from tier three vendors like ManageEngine and Hexcode, has proven difficult."
"Consistency is the area where the most improvement is needed. For example, there are some areas where the UI is not uniform across the board."
"I've heard there might be issues with scalability for larger enterprises."
"Microsoft Graph needs improvement."
"Trivy generates many false positives, flagging non-existent vulnerabilities."
"Trivy generates many false positives, flagging non-existent vulnerabilities. Improvements could include better contextual analysis or granular filtering."
"The reporting could be a little better. When integrating Trivy with CI, the interpretation of the reports could be improved."
"Trivy can improve by providing an output in PDF format."
"The only problem is that Trivy does not support reporting features such as generating reports in CSV, which is useful for auditing and reporting."
"For malware detection, I need to use two tools: Trivy as my anomaly scanner and ClamAV. I am integrating these two tools into the CI pipeline. If both malware and anomaly detection could be managed by one tool, I would not need to depend on two tools."
"Trivy can improve by providing an output in PDF format. Additionally, it takes longer to scan container images built with many layers."
"One drawback I have observed with Trivy is the difficulty in building or integrating a UI, particularly for an operator in the NetSuite example."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe is less expensive than other options."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"It is a little expensive. I would rate it a four out of ten for pricing."
"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"The pricing is somewhat high compared to other market tools."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's licensing and price were cheaper than the other solutions we looked at."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is costly."
"The pricing model for most plans is generally good, but the cost of the new Defender for Storage plan is high and should be revisited, as it could lead to disabling desirable security features due to cost."
"This solution is more cost-effective than some competing products. My understanding is that it is based on the number of integrations that you have, so if you have fewer subscriptions then you pay less for the service."
"Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products."
"I rate Microsoft Defender a three out of ten for affordability. The price could be a little lower."
"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
"We only use the free tier, so we haven't faced any pricing, setup costs, or licensing challenges."
"The pricing is very difficult because every type of Defender for Cloud has its own metrics and pricing. If you have Cloud for Key Vault, the pricing is different than it is for storage. Every type has its own pricing list and rules."
"While we pay for any additional features, the pricing seems competitive, though I am not involved in the specific cost details."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
From my personal experience, the alerting system needs to be faster. If something happens in our infrastructure, the ...
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 acros...
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?
The licensing is straightforward but can become expensive if you cover everything. You must balance the cost against ...
What needs improvement with Trivy?
One drawback I have observed with Trivy is the difficulty in building or integrating a UI, particularly for an operat...
What is your primary use case for Trivy?
The main use case for Trivy is to scan Docker images or packages for CVEs, specifically for vulnerabilities. I use th...
What advice do you have for others considering Trivy?
I rate Trivy an eight out of ten. This rating reflects its open-source nature, comprehensive scanning capabilities, a...
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
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.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Trivy and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.