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

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs Sysdig Secure 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)
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...
Ranking in Container Security
21st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sysdig Secure
Ranking in Container Security
20th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (4th)
 

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 Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.4%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sysdig Secure is 2.5%, up from 2.4% 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.
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.
Peter Du - PeerSpot reviewer
Gives real-time visibility and helps to articulate constantly-changing landscape
The main benefit for me personally is being able to articulate the ever-growing, dynamic, and constantly changing landscape. Just today, in a management leadership call, I was able to demonstrate that although we are solving a lot of these vulnerabilities, we are picking up new vulnerabilities each and every day. It allows me to articulate the importance of information security with actual real-time data. Sysdig's runtime insights help us detect and respond to threats that are happening in real-time. We can look at Sysdig dashboards or run reports to see precisely what happens in our runtime environment. A good use case of this was that when zero-day vulnerabilities came out, we could scan our environment to see if the vulnerabilities apply to any of our production workloads. Sysdig Secure helps us prioritize issues and distribute work. We are a small company, so we do not have multiple security or dev teams. We have two or three guys on my team. Having the ability to focus on critical vulnerabilities is crucial. It does not make sense to prioritize low-level threats when we have limited time. We do not use live threat investigation features as much as we would like because of different priorities, but it is something that we do use. Over time, it shows us whether we are putting the right effort into resolving issues. For example, when we look at the dashboard scene over a 30-day period, we can see whether the critical vulnerabilities are increasing or decreasing. It lets us know whether we are on the right track. We are currently using agentless scanning. Deploying it onto our cluster has enabled us to get full visibility into what is running on our cluster. Sysdig provides us with the contextual awareness we need to create an immediate incident response strategy. It provides links to the threat and explains the threat and the resolution possible. It equips us with the right information to make a decision on whether to address the threat immediately or take a risk in terms of deploying remediation. Sysdig has not enabled us to reduce the number of security tools we use. We were not using anything before Sysdig, and after choosing Sysdig, we did not have a need to look at anything else. Sysdig has not helped reduce external SOC costs. We are a very small business, so we do not have the budget for an external SOC. However, it has definitely alleviated the pressure to look for one and to source an external SOC. We have a project history to look at a virtual SOC and leverage tools that we do have, and Sysdig is a part of that. There is definitely a saving there because we have not had the need to go out and look for an external SOC. Sysdig has helped reduce the percentage of workloads that have security exposures that put the organization at risk. It has reduced the workload, mainly from an understanding of where we can assign work to cover the most ground in terms of resolving vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of PingSafe is its integration with most of our technology stack, specifically all of our cloud platforms and ticketing software."
"Our previous product took a lot of man hours to manage. Once we got Singularity Cloud Workload Security, it freed up our time to work on other tasks."
"I rate SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security ten out of ten."
"SentinelOne is far superior to our previous solution, Accops, due to its seamless updates, effortless maintenance, and user-friendly interface and dashboard."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"You not only get to know about vulnerabilities and misconfigurations but also some of the actual"
"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."
"We mostly use alerts. That has been pretty good. If we use the alert system from Amazon, it is much costlier to us, so we use PingSafe."
"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."
"Offers easy management with authentication and authorization features"
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share resources."
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"Sysdig Secure has many strong foundational features like compliance and benchmark, security, network access management, and vulnerability management."
"We appreciate this feature, especially when combined with CD monitoring. The implementation of requested features has been remarkable, such as scanning for compliance in CRM processes for the US government. We heavily rely on this feature to assess compliance with federal requirements."
"The most valuable feature is the level of support that we get. Our solutions or customer success representative is very valuable. I see them as an extension of our security team."
"From a container-based standpoint, it offers excellent scalability to its users...I would tell those planning to use the solution that, from a container standpoint, it's excellent."
"I see Sysdig as the most comprehensive solution in comparison to its competitors."
"The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying to do, he proactively takes that as an investigation topic and looks into it. He'll provide the solution even though we might not have asked him to investigate it."
"The log monitor is the most valuable feature."
"The tool has the capability to conduct scans initially. It can perform scans on your virtual machines, physical machines, containers, and container images. A standout feature is its ability to scan offline container images stored in your container registry. Additionally, it can scan runtime images in your cluster or on your host machine. This allows for the detection of vulnerabilities in running containers, including loaded libraries. Notably, the tool can identify which library vulnerabilities are already present in your system. An added advantage is its capacity to take action beyond threat detection. It has the ability to block access and respond to encountered threats."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"While SentinelOne offers robust security features, its higher cost may present a challenge for budget-conscious organizations."
"From my personal experience, the alerting system needs to be faster. If something happens in our infrastructure, the alert appears on the dashboard, but I have to log in to the dashboard and refresh it."
"Cloud Native Security's reporting could be better. We are unable to see which images are impacted. Several thousand images have been deployed, so if we can see some application-specific information in the dashboard, we can directly send that report to the team that owns the application. We'd also like the option to download the report from the portal instead of waiting for the report to be sent to our email."
"There should be more documentation about the product."
"The could improve their mean time to detect."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"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."
"I do see that some features associated with the IAST part are not included in the tool, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The solution needs to improve overall from a CSPM standpoint since they can't compete with Wiz or Orca."
"The dashboard could be more simple and show the more important issues that are detected first. We'd like to be able to set it up so more important issues show up more prominently in the dashboard."
"Sysdig Secure needs to scale more for complete cloud-native coverage."
"Banks and financial institutions cannot use Sysdig Secure because it doesn't sell SaaS-hosted versions for under two hundred working nodes."
"They should make it specific with a couple of features only."
"Perhaps, it could support more custom implementations, as our company utilizes custom implementations rather than standard ones. Configuring it requires a deep understanding and adjustment to our specific needs, which took some time. Other than that, I'm unsure about potential improvements. We were considering the possibility of compartmentalizing their tools. Currently, in Sysdig Secure, they bundle multiple features, and we are unable to use them individually. For instance, if we only need compliance scanning, we have to deploy the entire secure package. This is because of the way their agent functions, but I can't delve into more details."
"There was a security concern related to a specific feature. While the feature itself was promising, it posed a challenge. The situation revolved around code scanning. If your source code is hosted within your own premises, say on Bitbucket, you naturally wouldn't want your code to be accessible to external parties beyond your company. Keeping your code base private is a standard practice. However, in the case of code scanning using Sysdig Secure, they copy your code to their SaaS platform. This posed an issue for us. When we inquired about this, their response acknowledged the concern. In an upcoming release, they plan to enable code scanning within your on-premises environment through the assistance of an agent. This change is already in progress. While this tool stands out compared to existing solutions in the market, it's important to note that there are still some limitations to consider. Another drawback we encountered relates to our expertise with Kubernetes. The tool can monitor Kubernetes audit logs, triggering alerts and notifications. However, it falls short in terms of taking direct action based on these alerts. There are different methods of event capture, including through system labels and system calls, as well as via Kubernetes audit events. Notably, at the system level, Sysdig Secure can both detect and respond to events, allowing actions like blocking and warning. This proactive approach is effective at the system call level. However, when it comes to monitoring Kubernetes audit events, Sysdig Secure can only notify without being able to execute any further actions. It can't block access or containers. The vendor likened their role to that of a monitoring camera, observing events and sending notifications without the capacity to intervene. This limitation applies to Kubernetes audit events. Given that everything operates within our system, there is a workaround available: configuring system-level policies to block containers as necessary."
"Sysdig's biggest weakness is dashboarding and reporting. You have access to the data and can get everything you need, but we need the ability to summarize the information quickly in a format that senior leaders can understand. We report to the executive level and global board. I need to roll all that in-depth information into a quick summary, and their maturity level isn't there. I'm seeing that on the future road map, but it isn't there now."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is based on modules, which was ideal for us."
"While SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers robust protection, its high cost may be prohibitive for small and medium-sized businesses."
"It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market."
"SentinelOne is relatively cheap. If ten is the most expensive, I would rate it a seven."
"I would rate the cost a seven out of ten with ten being the most costly."
"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is costly."
"As a partner, we receive a discount on the licenses."
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"It's a costly solution"
"Sysdig is competitive. The quality matches the pricing. Obviously, everyone wants things to be cheaper, but if you're realistic, you acknowledge that quality service comes with a price. Sysdig is the gold standard for Kubernetes, and I wouldn't choose anything else. We live in Kubernetes. Everything is containerized, so that means a lot to us, and we're willing to make an investment."
"I am always going to say that it could be a little bit cheaper. I do feel that it is a little bit on the expensive side."
"In comparison to other cloud solutions, it's reasonably priced. However, when compared to in-house built open-source projects, it might be considered somewhat costly. The cost depends on whether someone sees the support provided by Sysdig as an advantage or if it's deemed unnecessary. Personally, I find the support to be excellent and consider it a good value."
"It is quite costly compared to other tools."
"The solution's pricing depends on the agents...In short, the price depends on the environment of its user."
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
25%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

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?
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 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 b...
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 th...
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,...
What do you like most about Sysdig Secure?
The proactiveness of the support has been fantastic. Every time we mention something in a meeting that we're trying t...
What needs improvement with Sysdig Secure?
Sysdig Secure could improve in terms of scalability and expanding services to other areas like database monitoring an...
What is your primary use case for Sysdig Secure?
Sysdig Secure ( /products/sysdig-secure-reviews ) is used for cloud-native infrastructure, application monitoring, an...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
StackRox
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
SAP Concur, Goldman Sachs, Worldpay, Experian, BigCommerce, Arkose Labs, Calendly, Noteable, Bloomreach. More here: https://sysdig.com/customers/
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. Sysdig Secure and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.