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

Qualys VMDR vs SUSE NeuVector comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 29, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Container Security
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
92
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)
Qualys VMDR
Ranking in Container Security
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
IT Asset Management (4th), Vulnerability Management (2nd), Configuration Management Databases (3rd), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (3rd)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Qualys VMDR is 2.9%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 3.2%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 29, 2024
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.
Harold Jensen - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 13, 2023
Good visibility but expensive and needs better support
Support: It's often overseas and often following a script, basically asking us to redo what we opened the case with. Multiple APIs: There seems to be a lack of easy onboarding into Qualys. We had to use manual inputs and some API calls to get items in place. Dashboard: It is very rudimentary with very little customization. The Qualys Scripting Language (QSL) works differently in different Qualys modules, so when you get it working in one area you have to modify the syntax in others. User account management: We often have to give users more rights than needed just to give them what they need. Integration with the various Qualys Modules: You can tell the UI is different based on of the different teams that created them. QSL syntax same in all modules Responsiveness of some of the components: They time out, you get a blank screen, etc. Backend updates between the various modules: You update connectors and information takes a few minutes to show in VMDR or Global Asset View Connectors: Connectors have a throttling issue with AWS which causes them to frequently fail unless you manually run them again.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 22, 2023
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cloud Native Security offers a valuable tool called an offensive search engine."
"The tool identifies issues quickly."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"It used to guide me about an alert. There is something called an alert guide. I used to click on the alert guide, and I could read everything. I could read about the alert and how to resolve it. I used to love that feature."
"We've seen a reduction in resources devoted to vulnerability monitoring. Before PingSafe we spent a lot of time monitoring and fixing these issues. PingSafe enabled us to divert more resources to the production environment."
"PingSafe's most valuable feature is its unified console."
"The agentless vulnerability scanning is great."
"It has a user-friendly dashboard that I can access without any difficulty."
"The features that are most valuable are the identification, scan features, and the identification of vulnerabilities."
"Technical support is fantastic."
"The most valuable feature is the vulnerability assessment."
"I value the scheduling of scans and reports as per the desired timeframes."
"It's really beneficial for scanning and interacting with the agent."
"The prioritization feature is great. I think it has all of the advanced features that we need."
"The process of defining and discovering scans is organized efficiently."
"The integrations for this solution are very good. I use a different product for virtual patching of vulnerabilities and Qualys integrates well with that product."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
 

Cons

"We wanted it to provide us with something like Claroty Hub in AWS for lateral movement. For example, if an EC2 instance or a virtual machine is compromised in a public subnet based on a particular vulnerability, such as Log4j, we want it to not be able to reach some of our databases. This kind of feature is not supported in PingSafe."
"It does not bring much threat intel from the outside world. All it does is scan. If it can also correlate things, it will be better."
"In addition to the console alerts, I would like PingSafe to also send email notifications."
"I would like PingSafe's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"I'd like to see better onboarding documentation."
"The documentation that I use for the initial setup can be more detailed or written in a more user-friendly language to avoid troubles."
"While the future roadmap presented by SentinelOne appears promising, I hope the envisioned advancements are realistically achievable and that the gap between current offerings and long-term goals is not too significant."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"When tested on Zero day, there were errors."
"Qualys VM's scanner doesn't pick up every vulnerability, so we have to use multiple scanners to cover that gap."
"Qualys VMDR could improve in reducing the occurrences of false positive vulnerabilities."
"Qualys VM could improve by having more skilled support personnel."
"Qualys VM's vulnerability scan could be improved, especially the number of CVE numbers it can manage at a time."
"Qualys VM should improve its methodology."
"The reporting in this solution can be improved."
"Certain integration factors between different options could be improved."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am personally not taking care of the pricing part, but when we moved from CrowdStrike to PingSafe, there were some savings. The price of CrowdStrike was quite high. Compared to that, the price of PingSafe was low. PingSafe is charging based on the subscription model. If I want to add an AWS subscription, I need to pay more. It should not be based on subscription. It should be based on the number of servers that I am scanning."
"PingSafe's primary advantage is its ability to consolidate multiple tools into a single user interface, but, beyond this convenience, it may not offer significant additional benefits to justify its price."
"As a partner, we receive a discount on the licenses."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"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."
"Its pricing is constant. It has been constant over the previous year, so I am happy with it. However, price distribution can be better explained. That is the only area I am worried about. Otherwise, the pricing is very reasonable."
"I wasn't sure what to expect from the pricing, but I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was a little less than I thought."
"PingSafe is affordable."
"The license is on a yearly basis."
"There are no additional fees in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"We have an annual contract for Qualys VMDR. I believe it's for either two years or five years."
"The solution is reasonably priced for the value it provides."
"The tool's pricing is expensive and I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"The solution is costly."
"We do see over $100,000 in terms of price, for mid-size programs. You likely will pay more than $100,000 without any discount. It is a bit pricey."
"It is different for every company, but for us, it's every three years."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
5%
Educational Organization
35%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
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?
I am personally not taking care of the pricing part, but when we moved from CrowdStrike to Singularity Cloud Native S...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
They can provide some kind of alert when a new type of risk is there. There can be a specific type of alert showing t...
What is your primary use case for Qualys VM?
Qualys VM is used for vulnerability scans for the internet and applications using application exchange. There are man...
What do you like most about Qualys VMDR?
I like that we have many scanners and channels that don't overload. It helps us scan and track easily. Also, the tagg...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Qualys VMDR?
I am not aware of the actual cost or pricing as it is managed by the client.
What do you like most about NeuVector?
The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NeuVector?
SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution. You have to pay for the support.
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Qualys VM, QualysGuard VM, Qualys Asset Inventory, Qualys Container Security, Qualys Virtual Scanner Appliance
NeuVector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Agrokor Group, American Specialty Health, American State Bank, Arval, Life:), Axway, Bank of the West, Blueport Commerce, BSkyB, Brinks, CaixaBank, Cartagena, Catholic Health System, CEC Bank, Cegedim, CIGNA, Clickability, Colby-Sawyer College, Commercial Bank of Dubai, University of Utah, eBay Inc., ING Singapore, National Theatre, OTP Bank, Sodexo, WebEx
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about Qualys VMDR vs. SUSE NeuVector and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.