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

Google Cloud Security Command Center vs Microsoft Defender for Cloud comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 2025

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 Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
3rd
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Cloud and Data Center Security (2nd), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (4th), Compliance Management (1st)
Google Cloud Security Comma...
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
24th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
18th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
4th
Ranking in Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (8th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (1st), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 3.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Security Command Center is 2.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 9.3%, down from 11.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM)
 

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.
Nishant_Mishra - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides visibility, address cloud misconfiguration and prevent threats
In terms of identifying, the solution is pretty good. It takes care of all the layers. We have Cloud, Kubernetes cluster, instances running, and network. We have identities, permissions, and access. It provides pictures of everything in GCP. There's no such integration required. There are Google APIs that you need to enable. The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies. It's pretty stable and scalable. However, visibility can be improved along with automation. SCC to provide an option to fix those things, perhaps by clicking a button. For example, if a firewall rule allows an application to accept HTTP traffic, I should be able to address that specific issue directly within the interface. It's just a regular call to action button. There are no prerequisites for the solution. It's a requirement to have good security visibility into your Google Cloud Infrastructure. Cloud Security Command Center could be a good product to consider. There are other open-source solutions available. There are solutions from Aqua that are pretty decent. I would recommend that if somebody is opting for SCC, they should also explore open-source solutions. Open-source solutions can be very beneficial, especially if they are pursuing a multi-cloud strategy. You won't need additional security tools for platforms like AWS or others. Whenever a security issue pops up, a generative AI backend provides a summary of what happened. The information provided is quite detailed. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
Vibhor Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps
Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The mean time to detect has been reduced."
"Cloud Native Security's evidence-based reporting allows us to prioritize issues by understanding their impact, helping us resolve the most important problems first."
"The visibility is the best part of the solution."
"The most valuable features of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"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."
"The user-friendliness is the most valuable feature."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers valuable features like runtime notifications. These alerts come to my account, ensuring that if any port or component within my infrastructure is opened or compromised, I am informed immediately. It highlights issues within minutes or even seconds."
"The tool identifies issues quickly."
"Most people use the threat detection dashboard."
"It simplifies compliance efforts."
"The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies."
"The solution's coordinated detection and response across devices and identities is impressive because it is complete."
"Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable and reliable as advertised."
"The solution is very easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security."
"The most valuable feature is that it's intuitive. It's very intuitive."
"This is a platform as a service provided by Azure. We don't need to install or maintain Azure Security Center. It is a ready-made service available in Azure. This is one of the main things that we like. If you look at similar tools, we have to install, maintain, and update services. Whereas, Azure Security Center manages what we are using. This is a good feature that has helped us a lot."
"Using Security Center, you have a full view, at any given time, of what's deployed, and that is something that is very useful."
"The pricing is good."
 

Cons

"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."
"I want SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security to integrate additional third-party resources. For example, SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is compatible with Azure and AWS, but Azure AD isn't integrated with AWS. If SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security had that ability, it would enrich the data because how users interact with our AWS environment is crucial. All the identity-related features require improvement."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security has limited legacy system support and may not fully support older operating systems or legacy environments."
"While SentinelOne offers robust security features, its higher cost may present a challenge for budget-conscious organizations."
"There's room for improvement in the graphic explorer."
"Sometimes the Storyline ID is a bit wacky."
"The Automation tab is an add-on that doesn’t work properly. They provide a list of scripts that don’t work and I have asked support to assist but they won’t help. When running on various endpoints the script doesn’t work and if it does, it’s only a couple. There are a lot of useful scripts that would be beneficial to run forensics, event logs, and process lists running on the endpoint."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"The AI capabilities have been heavily promoted, but I haven't seen a significant impact."
"Visibility can be improved along with automation."
"The user interface of Microsoft Defender for Cloud, like many Microsoft portals, undergoes frequent changes and feature relocation."
"From a compliance standpoint, they can include some more metrics and some specific compliances such as GDPR."
"Features like code scanning and pipeline scanning are not included in the solution."
"Microsoft Graph needs improvement."
"The documentation and implementation guides could be improved."
"Agent features need to be improved. They support agents through Azure Arc or Workbench. Sometimes, we are not able to get correct signals from the machines on which we have installed these agents. We are not able to see how many are currently reporting to Azure Security Center, and how many are currently not reporting. For example, we have 1,000 machines, and we have enrolled 1,000 OMS agents on these machines to collect the log. When I look at the status, even though at some places, it shows that it is connected, but when I actually go and check, I'm not getting any alerts from those. There are some discrepancies on the agent, and the agent features are not up to the mark."
"There are challenges with the licensing policies, which are quite complicated."
"Support needs to be highly responsive, especially in large enterprise environments."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingSafe is fairly priced."
"Their pricing appears to be based simply on the number of accounts we have, which is common for cloud-based products."
"We found it to be fine for us. Its price was competitive. It was something we were happy with. We are not a Fortune 500 company, so I do not know how pricing scales at the top end, but for our cloud environment, it works very well."
"It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"It is not that expensive. There are some tools that are double the cost of PingSafe. It is good on the pricing side."
"Singularity Cloud Security by SentinelOne is cost-efficient."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is costly."
"Initially, it used to be relatively expensive, starting at around four or five hundred dollars."
"The pricing is very difficult because every type of Defender for Cloud has its own metrics and pricing. If you have Cloud for Key Vault, the pricing is different than it is for storage. Every type has its own pricing list and rules."
"We only use the free tier, so we haven't faced any pricing, setup costs, or licensing challenges."
"I am not involved in this area. However, I believe its price is okay because even small customers are using Azure Security Center. I don't think it is very expensive."
"I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good."
"The pricing model for most plans is generally good, but the cost of the new Defender for Storage plan is high and should be revisited, as it could lead to disabling desirable security features due to cost."
"Azure Defender is a bit pricey. The price could be lower."
"Security Center charges $15 per resource for any workload that you onboard into it. They charge per VM or per data-base server or per application. It's not like Microsoft 365 licensing, where there are levels like E3 and E5. Security Center is pretty straightforward."
"There is a helpful cost-reducing option that allows you to integrate production subscriptions with non-production subscriptions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Retailer
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 don't handle the price part, but it isn't more expensive than Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. It's not cheap, but it is wor...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs ...
What do you like most about Google Cloud Security Command Center?
The compliance reporting feature helped us maintain a baseline of compliance within the information security policies.
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Security Command Center?
The primary use case is to monitor the Google Cloud infrastructure across all projects for security-related alerts. T...
How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening acros...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
No data available
Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Google Cloud Security Command Center vs. Microsoft Defender for Cloud and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.