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

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security comparison

 

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

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...
Ranking in Container Security
19th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
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)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.8%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Daniel Stevens - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve
I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The technical support is good."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."
"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."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers several valuable features, most notably the rapid vulnerability notifications that provide timely alerts regarding our infrastructure."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"Cloud Native Security's best feature is its ability to identify hard-coded secrets during pull request reviews."
"Cloud Native Security offers attack path analysis."
"The tool identifies issues quickly."
"I rate SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security ten out of ten."
"The management console is highly intuitive to comprehend and operate."
 

Cons

"The solution's price could be better."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"here is a bit of a learning curve. However, you only need two to three days to identify options and get accustomed."
"While SentinelOne offers robust security features, its higher cost may present a challenge for budget-conscious organizations."
"It took us a while to configure the software to work well in this type of environment, as the support documents were not always clear."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"The area of improvement is the cost, which is high compared to other traditional endpoint protections."
"The application module focuses on the different codes and libraries that can be run on the machines. It is very important for Singularity EDR to detect what type of codes and what type of libraries can run in the machine. If they can implement a white list or a black list of codes or libraries that can be used in the machine, it would be very helpful. They can focus more on the application module."
"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"For vulnerabilities, they are showing CVE ID. The naming convention should be better so that it indicates the container where a vulnerability is present. Currently, they are only showing CVE ID, but the same CVE ID might be present in multiple containers. We would like to have the container name so that we can easily fix the issue."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"It's a costly solution"
"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"Its pricing was a little less than other providers."
"I am not involved in the pricing, but it is cost-effective."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's pricing is good."
"Its pricing is okay. It is in line with what other providers were providing. It is not cheap. It is not expensive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for the prevention part, but currently, we need to do it manually. I hear that Palo Al...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling, and everything else.
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 features.
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?
The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashboard can also be laggy.
 

Also Known As

StackRox
PingSafe
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,071 professionals have used our research since 2012.