SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security Reviews

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud is on our computers and servers, mainly for threat hunting. I use it to ensure our devices remain healthy and are virus-free, ransomware-free, and threat-free.

We've felt more comfortable having SentinelOne Singularity Cloud because we've had a safer environment. The benefits from the platform were immediate.

What is most valuable in SentinelOne Singularity Cloud is that it can detect any threat on a machine or is being installed on a machine, so it is a platform that helps keep the environment safe.

I also found the real-time detection and response capabilities of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud impressive because it is a platform that uses artificial intelligence to determine what is normal and what is abnormal and can lock down any virus it may encounter.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud has good automated remediation capabilities. It can catch threats that other antiviruses do not.

The platform also has a very good deep visibility feature, enabling you to run scans and find what you need.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud provides excellent historical data to find what you need.

The platform reduced my organization's mean time to detect and mean time to remediate anywhere from a week to sixty days.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud also helped free up SOC staff, enabling staff to work on other projects or tasks. Through the platform, the team does not have to spend as much time trying to go through different objects on the machines manually.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud hasn't had a direct, everyday impact on my organization's productivity. What it has an impact on is uptime whenever there is a threat on a computer because it blocks it.

The platform has good interoperability with third-party solutions and integrates smoothly.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud is able to support my organization's ability to innovate. It is good in that aspect, though I have yet to work with that extensively.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud sometimes has false positives, but the main area for improvement I want to see is for it to become less resource-intensive. Right now, it can slow down processes on the machine, and it would be a massive improvement if it were more lightweight than it currently is.

I've been working with SentinelOne Singularity Cloud for about three years.

I found SentinelOne Singularity Cloud stable.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud is scalable, and it is pretty seamless in terms of autoscaling based on my organization's workload demands.

I have not contacted the SentinelOne Singularity Cloud technical support team.

My organization used Windows Defender but switched because SentinelOne Singularity Cloud was more robust.

Due to its notifications, you can also have the turnout time of obtaining telemetry data from SentinelOne Singularity Cloud automatically, so you do not have to watch it constantly to see the data. The platform automatically shuts down the computer, takes it off the network, and then reports to you versus Windows Defender, which requires you to do a little more research into the items, as it did not provide as much information.

I was involved in the initial setup of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud, which I found pretty straightforward.

We worked with a consultant in implementing SentinelOne Singularity Cloud.

Only two people were involved, and the process took about two weeks.

I believe there is ROI from SentinelOne Singularity Cloud because of its impact on productivity through its ability to remediate and self-resolve some of the items.

I have no information on how much SentinelOne Singularity Cloud costs.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing SentinelOne Singularity Cloud.

If someone were to tell me that they do not believe they need SentinelOne Singularity Cloud because they have a continuous security monitoring solution in place, I would disagree because, with the SentinelOne Singularity Cloud platform, you can allow or disallow items within the machine. It automatically disconnects the machine from the network, helping you determine what is happening.

My organization works with the cloud version of the platform. It is deployed in multiple departments, and about four hundred users work with the endpoints.

SentinelOne Singularity Cloud requires maintenance, but it's not difficult to maintain.

Only one person takes care of the maintenance of the platform.

My advice to other users who would like to start working with SentinelOne Singularity Cloud is that I would highly recommend it based on its abilities and what it can find and remediate for you. It is easy to deploy and maintain, so I would tell others it is a solid platform.

My rating for SentinelOne Singularity Cloud is eight out of ten.

I use it to monitor and update my clients. We have about seventy users, which we run the client on, and we pretty much just monitor the activities and update the agents when possible. We use it to make sure that there are no viruses or malware on the user end, the endpoint machines. It's an antivirus.

We were looking for a solution that wasn't hard to manage and wasn't intrusive on the client end. We needed something users couldn't make changes to or take up too much CPU. We wanted to make sure that when we loaded this on the user machine it wasn't going to tax it. 

The ease of use is great.

The portal is great. It's not complicated. I can find what I need and it's straightforward. It's not over complicated. 

The real time detection and response capabilities are good. I did a lot of research before signing up and doing the demo. They have a good reputation as far as catching threats early on. 

They have an automated remediation feature that I have used. You can resolve issues on the portal. 

The forensic visibility into the Linux kernel is very good. It helps to catch things early on. They've been able to remediate situations pretty quickly.

The historical record after the attacks is informative. It gives me the information I need. It's done really well.

The solution has helped me free up time. I go maybe once a week to see a status and if I get any alerts via email, I'll action something. My users are pretty educated and I haven't had to really worry too much. There's barely anything getting caught as the staff is all very diligent.

When it catches something, we're able to quickly get a handle on it. It's doing its job and we haven't had to worry about any attacks.

There isn't anything I don't like. It's really easy to use, for example. 

Their search feature could be better. When I go in and try to search for stuff, it could be a bit easier. It can be a little cumbersome. 

I've been using the solution for two years. We're going to be renewing our contract soon. 

I've had no stability issues at all.  

It's easy to scale. Scaling is straightforward.

We're a non-profit, so we won't grow too much. We don't really have use for the auto scaling feature. However, the feature does make scaling easy for those who need to grow.

I've barely contacted technical support. I've only spoken to sales in regard to demos. I had to call support once when an agent didn't install correctly. I had them get a cleaner to remove it from the machine. That only happened once. They were very helpful and it was easy to contact them. I was done in ten minutes. 

Positive

I did previously use McAfee. When we had to renew, we were looking for something simple on the client end and pretty light. McAfee tends to tax the machine a bit. It had a clunky client as well. The reputation of Sentinel was also better than McAfee's. 

I was involved with the initial deployment. The setup was straightforward. I had no issues with the setup.

Outside of occasionally upgrading the agents, there is no maintenance needed. 

I handled the setup myself and my boss. 

The pricing and licensing are competitive. 

We were evaluating McAfee and Symantec and a few other companies. I can't recall the others. Sentinel just stood out. 

To those who have a continuous monitoring solution in place, I'd advise them to have something running on their client end as well. Otherwise, you don't have full coverage. 

I haven't really integrated the solution with any third-party solutions.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. It's straightforward and not that hard to work with. You don't have to do too much prep work before jumping in. It's an easy solution to implement. 

I use SentinelOne for the traffic flow in my customer's account.

Singularity Cloud Security gives us alerts, and it is helpful for us to get these alerts. We get to know about any issues through these alerts. We can resolve the issues accordingly.

It helps resolve issues more quickly. I do not have to analyze them on my own. We get to know the issues, and we also have documentation and recommendations about how to resolve them. That is very helpful for me.

We were able to realize its benefits pretty quickly because I already had its knowledge. I had studied a little bit and researched it. After implementation, my work got faster by almost 60% to 70%. The client was happy with that.

Singularity Cloud Security has reduced the number of risks. After resolving an issue on one of the servers, I can implement the fix on other servers before getting alerts about those. There is about 70% to 80% reduction.

It has been beneficial for all team members because we are all working in shifts and we are not able to communicate with each other much. The documentation has helped a lot.

Our security posture is much better. I do not have the numbers, but we see fewer notifications about security and threats. We follow the guidelines and best practices.

The security that it provides is valuable. It has a user-friendly dashboard that I can access without any difficulty.

Security notifications or alerts are also very useful. The alert mechanism helps in identifying issues.

It is very easy to use. I would rate it a nine out of ten for usability.

Sometimes, I am not able to see the flow when there is an issue. When anyone complains and I have to troubleshoot it, I find it difficult to search. 

The documentation that I use for the initial setup can be more detailed or written in a more user-friendly language to avoid troubles.

I have six months of experience using it.

It is stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

It is scalable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability. Our clients are large organizations.

In our AWS Cloud, we have multiple accounts. We have almost 400 users. The AppSec team is a different team that is responsible for its installation. We are its users.

I use vendor support. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I did not use any different solution before.

Initially, it took a lot of time because I had to first learn it and then implement it. First time, there can be some challenges. It took some time to understand because it was my first setup. Once I understood the process, it became easier with subsequent setups.

We implemented this solution after reviewing the documentation. Our AppSec team deployed it.

I would recommend this solution. I find it very user-friendly, and the documentation is also good enough to give solutions, which is very important. In addition to notifications, we also get solutions.

I would rate Singularity Cloud Security a nine out of ten.

PingSafe was being used for cybersecurity and governance. The company where I used to work wanted to secure sensitive information or prevent any data leaks. It provided good protection.

I used it on a daily basis. If any alert came up, or any best practice needed to be followed, I used to look into the alerts and work on the issue so that it did not affect our systems.

PingSafe includes proof of exploitability in its evidence-based reporting. It helps to secure sensitive information saved in the cloud. It provides alerts in the case of any vulnerability. I felt secure when I was using PingSafe.

The alerts had severity levels, such as low, medium, and high. I used to give priority to the ones with a high severity level and then I used to handle the ones with medium or low severity.

Before PingSafe, it was a bit difficult to know all the vulnerabilities. There were some services in AWS, but we had to configure them and check them on a daily basis for any alerts. PingSafe was more reliable. Our InfoSec team used to inform us about any vulnerabilities and then we used to resolve them. PingSafe was more beneficial for our organization for security purposes.

PingSafe improved our security posture. I would rate it a nine out of ten for that.

PingSafe improved our mean time to detect. Its dashboards were helpful, and there was continuous improvement.

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.

Its interface was pretty good. It was very easy to use.

It was also good for compliance, but I was not handling that part. I only used to view the alerts and solve the issues. The other aspects were handled by my seniors.

I used to work on AWS. At times, I would generate a normal bug in my system, and then I would check PingSafe. The alert used to come after about three and a half hours. It used to take that long to generate the alert about the vulnerability in my system. If a hacker attacks a system and PingSafe takes three to four hours to generate an alert, it will not be beneficial for the company. It would be helpful if we get the alert in five to ten minutes.

Another issue was that when there was a new alert, I did not get an email or notification on my personal email. I had to log in and refresh the screen to check if any new alerts came. It would be beneficial if an email or a notification could be sent to a personal email or mobile number.

We had a few false positives. For example, for Amazon EBS volumes, PingSafe sometimes used to give an alert saying that an EBS volume was created in the East US region, whereas no EBS volume was created. It was a false alert. We discussed these false alerts with the PingSafe team and gave them feedback. We muted those alerts, but such a thing should not happen. However, the number of false positives reduced over time. Initially, if we had 10 false positives, then later on, we had only one or two.

They can enhance the dashboard and make it more user-friendly. They can also provide more information in the alerts about remediation.

I used PingSafe for almost 1.5 years.

It is stable. I would rate it a 9 out of 10 for stability.

It is scalable. I would rate it a 9 out of 10 for scalability.

We had approximately 15 to 20 users in our organization. We had multiple departments, but all the applications were deployed only on AWS.

I never used their support in 1.5 years. A different team interacted with them.

I have only used PingSafe.

It was deployed on the cloud and on-premises. Its initial setup was not complex. It was easy to understand.

Its deployment took a few days.

2-3 people were involved in its deployment.

It saved resources. There were 20% to 30% savings.

It is cheap.

I would recommend PingSafe to others. Overall, I would rate PingSafe a 9 out of 10.

We use it to monitor Azure and AWS accounts. We also use it to monitor the GitHub account for any data leakage and misconfigurations and also to have proactive configuration checks.

We were looking for a CNAPP solution that could provide details about cloud misconfigurations, compliance, and any risks. PingSafe provides that. The feature of offensive security has been very helpful for us.

We only use agentless scanning. We have not installed agents anywhere. It collects data and provides information.

We use PingSafe's Offensive Security Engine. The analytics features of PingSafe are something that other providers do not provide. They have scanning on the port base and simulation of attacks. It is a very helpful feature to proactively resolve issues. It handles verifying actual exploit paths and prioritizing breach potential very well.

The proactive approach and offensive security have helped us to fix things in advance before they can be exploited.

We were able to realize its benefits immediately. As soon as you configure it, it does its job. It takes a day to configure it and discover the assets. It is easily deployable, and it immediately starts providing inputs.

PingSafe helped reduce the number of false positives. It also helps with our SOC monitoring. The alerts are reduced, and we are in compliance.

We get details about how much we are compliant with different frameworks. It helps us to evaluate the risk posture as well. We use the reports to evaluate our risk posture.

The proactive approach and advanced fixes reduce the number of false positives, but it is difficult to know if PingSafe has reduced our mean time to detect. PingSafe has definitely reduced our mean time to remediate.

PingSafe has not had an effect on the collaboration among various teams because, in our environment, everything is done by IT, but we have visibility across all the domains. We can work together if needed, but it is not yet applicable to our organization.

The offensive security where they do a fix is valuable. They go to a misconfiguration and provide detailed alerts on what could be there. They also provide a remediation feature where if we give the permission, they can also go and fix the issue.

They also support private clouds to a certain extent. It is pretty easy and customizable.

PingSafe's interface is pretty easy and comfortable. They keep on improvising it. When you are configuring, it is pretty easy.

It is a very secluded solution. It works only as CNAPP. 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. It can discover the threats from the outside world. It can discover the threats or vulnerabilities happening across those assets. If it can bring that in and evaluate, it will be good.

We have been using PingSafe for a year.

It is stable. We have not observed any issues.

We have not increased our assets, so it is difficult to say anything about the scalability part.

I never had to contact their support.

We were not using a similar solution previously.

It was pretty easy. It was very straightforward. They had many things available. We got the scripts on Azure, AWS, and GitHub, so the installation was pretty easy. It took a couple of hours.

It is a cloud solution. It does not require any maintenance.

We implemented it on our own. Only one person was required from our side.

Their support was not required. They offered to help. They assigned a customer success manager, but it was easy to deploy, so we did not require much help from their side.

Its pricing is okay. It is in line with what other providers were providing. It is not cheap. It is not expensive.

We evaluated 2 more products. One was Zscaler, and the other one was Wiz. Offensive security and support for the private cloud were the reasons for going for PingSafe.

I would advise evaluating PingSafe based on the use cases. You should know what is required and how PingSafe can support that. If PingSafe is able to fulfill your cases, it will be good. A thorough evaluation and mapping of the organization's objective should be done before buying PingSafe.

I would rate PingSafe an 8 out of 10. It is good.

I am working with AWS. I'm a junior cloud engineer and on the client side, we use this software for security. We use this just for scanning all across the AWS environment for any bug, vulnerability, or high risk security issues, and we have to resolve these issues. The solution offers us low to critical alerts and our work depends on these alerts. If it is a critical alert, we have to resolve things as soon as possible. 

The scanning is very good. We have an AWS environment and we can scan our whole account very quickly. Once the alerts get analyzed, we can automatically start removing issues. 

It's easy to use. It comes with preconfigured settings. I haven't had to really change anything for months. 

We have used evidence-based reporting. We're able to give reports on AWS, for example, how many data centers are used, et cetera. We can collect all of the information from PingSafe and share all kinds of data which we can share with the database team for analysis. 

The IaC scanning has been good. It's very interesting. 

When I create a stack for any services in AWS, I can scan everything in a robust environment. This enables me to understand the level of protection.

PingSafe can also scan code and provide alerts of there are vulnerabilities.

It's helped us reduce the number of false positives. I've been on the project for 6 months, and it was only until 3 or 4 months in that I received a false alert. Out of 20 alerts coming in, maybe only one or two are wrong. 

The mean time to detect has been reduced. We check PingSafe every day for a project happening 24/7. We check it frequently to ensure issues are being addressed quickly. We try to be consistent, however, the alerts don't come in at a certain time. They come in at varying times; we just work to keep on top of them.

We've had a glitch in PingSafe where it has fed us false positives in the past.

Sometimes, it takes a few hours to detect a misconfiguration. It would be ideal if that happened faster. Detections should happen in minutes, not hours. 

I've been using the solution for 6 months.

I have not noticed any lagging or crashing. The stability seems to be good. 

We have dealt with support in the past. They were helpful.

Neutral

We did not previously use a different product.

We had senior members of the team manage the installation since they had expertise. I'm not sure how long the process itself took. 

I don't have any visibility on the pricing. 

I'd rate the solution 8 out of 10. 

There are a lot of options. It's a good idea to have a team member arrange on at least a quarterly basis, a review so that new team members can get up to speed on the product and everyone stays on the same page. This will help new team members understand the product. 

We have AWS for most of our infrastructure, however, we don't have a dedicated security team. There are a lot of potential vulnerabilities which we are concerned about. We use PingSafe for security. For example, if there are open ports or incorrect configurations, we would get alerted and could fix them.

They have dedicated cloud-based configurations, which are quite helpful. 

The product works well with AWS. It can help us manage AWS security. If there are any groups or details that are incorrect or unsafe, or even misconfigured, it helps protect us. 

The product offers ISE scanning, which basically scans all activities for issues. 

We can pick up on pre-production issues. It's very helpful. They've helped us by providing a lot of CI/CD tools. Everything gets scanned so that we can get a sign-off before a deployment.

The ease of use is very good. I'd rate the ease of use 8 out of 10. They have nice UI and templates and the docmentation is very helpful. It's very thorough. 

They also have a good support system for users. If something is not working, they have a good SLA, and within a day or so, they will reach out and help you with whatever you need. 

The agentless vulnerability scanning is great.

If a protocol is not being properly followed, we'll be alerted. This helps us react faster to any production issues. 

We do use the offensive security engine. It's good for verifying exploit paths and prioritizing items. We have recently started using this. It allows us to see which endpoints, for example, are publically accessible, or what code repositories have vulnerabilities in terms of libraries we are using that may be outdated. For example, if we've noted our NGINX server is very publically exposed we can change things. 

The benefits of the product were felt almost immediately as it allowed us to handle issues in the pre-production phase. We didn't have to make anything live before finding issues. Within an hour, we'd begin to see issues, and within 4 to 6 hours, we'd have a full survey of security vulnerabilities. We also get regular notifications when the system sees something is off. Based on the information we receive, we're able to react and fix things very quickly.

We're able to see both high and low-priority issues so that we can accurately prioritize what to do first. That helps us manage bandwidth in terms of resources. 

PingSafe has helped us reduce the amount of false positives we see. We've reduced false positives by around one-third. 

Our mean time to detect has been reduced, as well as our mean time to respond. We used to rely on a third-party provider to find issues, and now we can do it in-house. This means we no longer have to sync our AWS information on a daily basis. Now, we have a direct integration with PingSafe. We used to have a delay of 36 to 48 hours before we would recognize if there were any vulnerabilities. On top of that, there was a reaction time delay of 4 to 6 hours, meaning issues wouldn't be dealt with until maybe 50 or so hours after the vulnerability was detected. We've reduced all of this down to maybe 8 to 10 hours.

The collaboration between cloud security, application developers, and AppSec teams has been better. It's mostly been positive for us. 

They could improve on their UI.  Sometimes it's not clear where to look when seeking information. Support often can direct us by giving us the correct link to what we are looking for. 

I'd like to see better onboarding documentation. If we want to be able to integrate something new, such as new assets, it can be difficult. 

I've used the solution for more than 2 years now. We started using it around December 2021 or January 2022. 

I haven't faced any lagging or crashing. 

For our use case, it has been scalable. 

The support they provide is good. They give you very detailed information and documentation which they have created internally. They are very informative. They've even shared their own internal documentation in terms of AWS issues or questions. 

They are quick to respond, You can rely on them. 

Positive

We did use a different solution, however, it didn't offer direct AWS integration. Due to this, we had to wait up to 48 hours for information on vulnerability issues. We were already having security issues in that timeframe, so we needed something that could help us detect faster. 

The initial deployment was easy. However, having more initial onboarding documentation would have been better. However, we've created some internal docs that have helped us with our use case. How long it takes to deploy depends on the use case, however, we were able to have it up in 12 to 14 hours. We had 2 people working on the deployment. 

PingSafe did offer some assistance with the setup.

I'm not sure of the exact pricing. However, my understanding is that it is very economical. 

We did explore Crowd Strike at some point. Crowd Strike was a very big platform and we were not sure how much support we'd get. We wanted to make sure we had priority support.

I'd rate the solution 9 out of 10. The usability is very good. Both their new and mature products are good in terms of their overall usability.

We have a wide array of applications. It extends beyond mere container and threat management; in fact, we extensively utilize it across all facets of our cloud data management. It offers comprehensive security for our entire infrastructure, encompassing containers, Kubernetes, cloud services, and more. Its scalability is particularly beneficial for our operations.

We receive Slack alerts for any vulnerable resources within our inventory. These alerts indicate if a particular resource is vulnerable and requires attention, ensuring timely action for remediation. Additionally, critical events are promptly communicated to us, enhancing our overall security posture.

Furthermore, we are provided with compliance metrics, allowing us to gauge our level of adherence to regulatory standards and guidelines.

Cloud Native Security's automation features have revolutionized our approach to cloud-native security, making it a standout solution in the market. With its seamless automation capabilities and timely alert notifications, Cloud Native Security ensures that we stay ahead of potential vulnerabilities, providing peace of mind in our dynamic cloud environment.

One of Cloud Native Security's greatest strengths lies in its ability to streamline compliance management. While specific controls are not directly provided, Cloud Native Security's automated assessment of our cloud and server infrastructure empowers us to maintain compliance effortlessly. The platform offers comprehensive insights into our compliance status, allowing us to identify areas for improvement and scale up our operations with confidence.

During our initial implementation, Cloud Native Security proved invaluable in tackling the challenges posed by our extensive resource inventory. By providing a detailed breakdown of resource utilization and associated vulnerabilities, Cloud Native Security enabled us to take proactive measures to enhance our security posture. The intuitive dashboard interface offers granular control and simplifies decision-making, sparing us the burden of manual inspections.

Cloud Native Security's automated auditing feature sets it apart, offering a comprehensive overview of our cloud resources with minimal effort. The asset inventory feature provides detailed insights into resource usage, ensuring that no stone is left unturned in our quest for security and compliance excellence. While there may be a slight learning curve initially, Cloud Native Security's user-friendly interface makes navigation a breeze over time.

The evidence-based reporting functionality of Cloud Native Security is a game-changer, allowing us to prioritize and address critical security issues efficiently. While occasional false positives may occur, Cloud Native Security's continuous improvement efforts ensure that such instances are minimal and swiftly addressed. Integration with our existing security infrastructure further enhances its capabilities, providing a holistic approach to our security strategy.

Overall, Cloud Native Security has been instrumental in fortifying our risk posture and facilitating our growth trajectory. With a significant reduction in mean time to detect issues and improved visibility for our development teams through DevSecOps integration, Cloud Native Security has truly become an indispensable asset in our security arsenal.

While we do encounter occasional false positives, we appreciate Cloud Native Security's efforts to address this issue.

In terms of improvement, we believe there's room for enhancing the comprehensiveness of their rule sets. Specifically, if we have unique requirements for our cloud security and need to establish custom rule sets, we require more comprehensive options than currently available. While Cloud Native Security has provided a feature for this purpose, its implementation is currently challenging. We see this as an area for improvement where Cloud Native Security could refine its offerings to better meet the diverse needs of its users.

I've been using the solution for 1.5 years. 

We have not found any glitches or suffered any downtime. 

Currently, we have approximately three platform engineers actively utilizing the solution.

The solution demonstrates excellent scalability and offers considerable flexibility.

Technical support is good. They help us out on certain details. We can submit tickets in order to get assistance. 

Positive

Previously, we didn't employ a different solution; instead, we relied on various open-source tools. While these tools weren't direct competitors, their functionalities didn't fully align with what we needed. Since adopting this solution, we've witnessed significant improvements in scaling our security measures effectively.

The initial onboarding process for Cloud Native Security resources presented some challenges, albeit manageable ones. However, the deployment itself was remarkably swift, typically taking only 15 to 20 minutes. Incorporating Cloud Native Security into our original deployment was crucial for establishing permissions effectively. To manage power demand efficiently, we required running scripts consistently.

As a Software as a Service (SaaS) solution, deployment to multiple locations wasn't necessary. Cloud Native Security is hosted on their cloud platform, eliminating concerns about maintenance or internal management on our end. We can rely on the provider for seamless operation without the need for internal intervention.

The pricing is fair, as it is determined by the resources we utilize. We have the flexibility to adjust our resource usage according to our needs.

Prior to implementing this solution, we didn't assess any other options.

Currently, the market offers numerous products for cloud-native security. Despite the abundance of choices, we received excellent guidance with this solution. The support provided was invaluable, demonstrating their strength in customer success.

As end users, we don't maintain a direct relationship with the company.

I highly recommend this solution to fellow users.

In terms of rating, I would give the solution a solid 9 out of 10.