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

SUSE NeuVector vs Snyk 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
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
104
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)
Snyk
Ranking in Container Security
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (4th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Software Development Analytics (2nd), DevSecOps (1st)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
21st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (18th)
 

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 Snyk is 5.6%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 2.8%, down from 3.1% 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.
meetharoon - PeerSpot reviewer
Affordable tool boosts code scanning efficiency but faces integration hurdles
The most important feature of Snyk is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions such as Check Point. It is easy to consolidate Snyk across multiple entities within a large organization. Additionally, our integration of Snyk into GitHub allows us to automatically scan codebases and identify issues, which has improved efficiency.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
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 is a tool that has good monitoring features."
"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"Singularity Cloud Security offers autonomous response capabilities, automatically remediating threats and restoring affected files without manual intervention."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"The visibility PingSafe provides into the Cloud environment is a valuable feature."
"I would definitely recommend SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security for infrastructure security."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"We use the infrastructure as code scanning, which is good."
"The advantage of Snyk is that Snyk automatically creates a pull request for all the findings that match or are classified according to the policy that we create. So, once we review the PR within Snyk and we approve the PR, Snyk auto-fixes the issue, which is quite interesting and which isn't there in any other product out there. So, Snyk is a step ahead in this particular area."
"The most valuable features of Snyk are vulnerability scanning and automation. The automation the solution brings around vulnerability scanning is useful."
"It is one of the best product out there to help developers find and fix vulnerabilities quickly. When we talk about the third-party software vulnerability piece and potentially security issues, it takes the load off the user or developer. They even provide automitigation strategies and an auto-fix feature, which seem to have been adopted pretty well."
"There are many valuable features. For example, the way the scanning feature works. The integration is cool because I can integrate it and I don't need to wait until the CACD, I can plug it in to our local ID, and there I can do the scanning. That is the part I like best."
"The most important feature of Snyk is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions such as Check Point."
"I find SCA to be valuable. It can read your libraries, your license and bring the best way to resolve your problem in the best scenario."
"The product's most valuable features are an open-source platform, remote functionality, and good pricing."
"The most valuable features are their GitLab and JIRA integrations. The GitLab integration lets us pull projects in pretty easily, so that it's pretty minimal for developers to get it set up. Using the JIRA integration, it's also pretty easy to get the information that is generated, as a result of that GitLab integration, back to our teams in a non-intrusive way and in a workflow that we are already using."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"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 most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
 

Cons

"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 resolution suggestions could be better, and the compliance features could be more customizable for Indian regulations. Overall, the compliance aspects are good. It gives us a comprehensive list, and its feedback is enough to bring us into compliance with regulations, but it doesn't give us the specific objects."
"The area of improvement is the cost, which is high compared to other traditional endpoint protections."
"Sometimes the Storyline ID is a bit wacky."
"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 it is good, I think the solution's console could be improved."
"A two-month grace period for extended searches would be a valuable improvement."
"To enhance the notification system's efficiency, resolved issues should be promptly removed from the portal."
"The product is very expensive."
"We have seen cases where tools didn't find or recognize certain dependencies. These are known issues, to some extent, due to the complexity in the language or stack that you using. There are some certain circumstances where the tool isn't actually finding what it's supposed to be finding, then it could be misleading."
"It would be great if they can include dynamic, interactive, and run-time scanning features. Checkmarx and Veracode provide dynamic, interactive, and run-time scanning, but Snyk doesn't do that. That's the reason there is more inclination towards Veracode, Checkmarx, or AppScan. These are a few tools available in the market that do all four types of scanning: static, dynamic, interactive, and run-time."
"We have to integrate with their database, which means we need to send our entire code to them to scan, and they send us the report. A company working in the financial domain usually won't like to share its code or any information outside its network with any third-party provider."
"It lists projects. So, if you have a number of microservices in an enterprise, then you could have pages of findings. Developers will then spend zero time going through the pages of reports to figure out, "Is there something I need to fix?" While it may make sense to list all the projects and issues in these very long lists for completeness, Snyk could do a better job of bubbling up and grouping items, e.g., a higher level dashboard that draws attention to things that are new, the highest priority things, or things trending in the wrong direction. That would make it a lot easier. They don't quite have that yet in container security."
"We use Bamboo for CI.CD, and we had problems integrating Snyk with it. Ultimately, we got the two solutions to work together, but it was difficult."
"Snyk has several limitations, including issues with Gradle, NPM, and Xcode, and trouble with AutoPR."
"I would like to give further ability to grouping code repositories, in such a way that you could group them by the teams that own them, then produce alerting to those teams. The way that we are seeing it right now, the alerting only goes to a couple of places. I wish we could configure the code to go to different places."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"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."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For pricing, it currently seems to be in line with market rates."
"PingSafe is priced reasonably for our workload."
"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"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."
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"The licensing is easy to understand and implement, with some flexibility to accommodate dynamic environments."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"Their pricing appears to be based simply on the number of accounts we have, which is common for cloud-based products."
"I didn't think the price was that great, but it wasn't that bad, either. I'd rate their pricing as average in the market."
"The product's price is okay."
"It's good value. That's the primary thing. It's not cheap-cheap, but it's good value."
"The price of the solution is expensive compared to other solutions."
"Cost-wise, it's similar to Veracode, but I don't know the exact cost."
"With Snyk, you get what you pay for. It is not a cheap solution, but you get a comprehensiveness and level of coverage that is very good. The dollars in the security budget only go so far. If I can maximize my value and be able to have some funds left over for other initiatives, I want to do that. That is what drives me to continue to say, "What's out there in the market? Snyk's expensive, but it's good. Is there something as good, but more affordable?" Ultimately, I find we could go cheaper, but we would lose the completeness of vision or scope. I am not willing to do that because Snyk does provide a pretty important benefit for us."
"It's inexpensive and easy to license. It comes in standard package sizing, which is straightforward. This information is publicly found on their website."
"I would rate the pricing of Snyk at two. I'm currently using the free version, which the company offers before buying the full version. So, the price is affordable, especially for an enterprise."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 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%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

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?
The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashb...
How does Snyk compare with SonarQube?
Snyk does a great job identifying and reducing vulnerabilities. This solution is fully automated and monitors 24/7 to...
What do you like most about Snyk?
The most effective feature in securing project dependencies stems from its ability to highlight security vulnerabilit...
What needs improvement with Snyk?
Snyk has several limitations, including issues with Gradle, NPM, and Xcode, and trouble with AutoPR. It lacks the abi...
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?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node por...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
No data available
NeuVector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
StartApp, Segment, Skyscanner, DigitalOcean, Comic Relief
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about SUSE NeuVector vs. Snyk and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.