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

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs Trivy comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Trivy
Ranking in Container Security
16th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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 Trivy is 5.5%, up from 0.7% 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.
Utsav Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Maintain operational efficiency by detecting misconfigurations and vulnerabilities
The vulnerability scanning feature is excellent as it supports various container capabilities like Docker and Sharma. It also offers repository scanning in the source code domain, allowing pre-push code scans. The misconfiguration detection works well for CloudFormation, Docker files, and Terraform. Its compliance support, like NIST, ensures that configurations align with standards. Trivy helps me significantly detect misconfigurations missed by the ops engineers or in Terraform by the naked eye. It ensures that my deployments are free of misconfigurations and vulnerabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"PingSafe released a new security graph tool that helps us identify the root issue. Other tools give you a pass/fail type of profile on all misconfigurations, and those will run into the thousands. PingSafe's graphing algorithm connects various components together and tries to identify what is severe and what is not. It can correlate various vulnerabilities and datasets to test them on the back end to pinpoint the real issue."
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"We like PingSafe's vulnerability assessment and management features, and its vulnerability databases."
"The user-friendliness is the most valuable feature."
"Singularity Cloud Security's most valuable features are its ease of scalability and comprehensive security measures."
"The cloud misconfiguration is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of PingSafe are the asset inventory and issue indexing."
"PingSafe has a dashboard that can detect the criticality of a particular problem, whether it falls under critical, medium, or low vulnerability."
"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."
"I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security."
"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."
"Offers easy management with authentication and authorization features"
"The technical support is good."
"One of the great features of Trivy is that it helps me scan items such as AWS credentials and GCP service accounts."
"It is open-source."
"I definitely recommend Trivy."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"Trivy's open source nature and wide functionality are incredibly valuable."
"Overall, I would rate Trivy a ten out of ten."
"Trivy is easy to integrate with CI/CD and can be installed on desktops to scan images."
"Trivy is easy to integrate with CI/CD and can be installed on desktops to scan images."
 

Cons

"One of the issues with the product stems from the fact that it clubs different resources under one ticket."
"Implementing single sign-on requires a pre-class account feature, which is currently not available."
"We use PingSafe and also SentinelOne. If PingSafe integrated some of the endpoint security features of SentinelOne, it would be the perfect one-stop solution for everything. We wouldn't need to switch between the products. At my organization, I am responsible for endpoint security and vulnerability management. Integrating both functions into one application would be ideal because I could see all the alerts, heat maps, and reports in one console."
"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."
"The alerting system of the product is an area that I look at and sometimes get confused about. I feel the alerting feature needs improvement."
"We repeatedly get alerts on the tool dashboard that we've already solved on our end, but they still appear. That is somewhat irritating."
"The reporting works well, but sometimes the severity classifications are inaccurate. Sometimes, it flags an issue as high-impact, but it should be a lower severity."
"Their search feature could be better."
"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."
"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's price could be better."
"The support and specifications need to be up to date for the cluster technologies"
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The testing process could be improved."
"Having little experience can hinder the ability to connect it to a user-friendly UI effectively."
"Trivy can improve by providing an output in PDF format."
"For malware detection, I need to use two tools: Trivy as my anomaly scanner and ClamAV. I am integrating these two tools into the CI pipeline. If both malware and anomaly detection could be managed by one tool, I would not need to depend on two tools. That would be my suggestion."
"One drawback I have observed with Trivy is the difficulty in building or integrating a UI, particularly for an operator in the NetSuite example."
"Trivy generates many false positives, flagging non-existent vulnerabilities."
"Trivy can improve by providing an output in PDF format. Additionally, it takes longer to scan container images built with many layers."
"The only problem is that Trivy does not support reporting features such as generating reports in CSV, which is useful for auditing and reporting."
"In our CI/CD pipelines, Trivy lacks built-in functionality for report analysis."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The features included in PingSafe justify its price point."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is costly."
"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."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's pricing is good."
"For pricing, it currently seems to be in line with market rates."
"While SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers robust protection, its high cost may be prohibitive for small and medium-sized businesses."
"PingSafe falls somewhere in the middle price range, neither particularly cheap nor expensive."
"I am not involved in the pricing, but it is cost-effective."
"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"
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
845,960 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
 

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 needs improvement with Trivy?
One drawback I have observed with Trivy is the difficulty in building or integrating a UI, particularly for an operat...
What is your primary use case for Trivy?
The main use case for Trivy is to scan Docker images or packages for CVEs, specifically for vulnerabilities. I use th...
What advice do you have for others considering Trivy?
I rate Trivy an eight out of ten. This rating reflects its open-source nature, comprehensive scanning capabilities, a...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
StackRox
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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. Trivy and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,960 professionals have used our research since 2012.