Trending December 2023 # Sentinelone Vs Crowdstrike: Endpoint Security Comparison # Suggested January 2024 # Top 18 Popular

You are reading the article Sentinelone Vs Crowdstrike: Endpoint Security Comparison updated in December 2023 on the website We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested January 2024 Sentinelone Vs Crowdstrike: Endpoint Security Comparison

The two companies provide similar platforms and serve comparable user bases, but the two companies differ in key areas, like industry focus, use cases, and reach.

See below for a close comparison of SentinelOne vs. Crowdstrike to determine which endpoint security and extended detection and response (XDR) vendor best meets your company’s cybersecurity needs:

Also read: Top Network Security Trends

The SentinelOne endpoint security portfolio features these key offerings:

Main software: Singularity XDR Platform, SentinelOne for Zero Trust, and SentinelOne Data for data management.

Services: Managed detection and response (MDR), digital forensics and incident response (DFIR), threat hunting, compromise assessments, guided onboarding, customer support, account management, and user training.

Overall: SentinelOne offers fewer platform solutions and modules to choose from but more industry verticals are represented for different types of customers.

The Crowdstrike endpoint security portfolio includes these primary offerings:

Main software: Crowdstrike Falcon Endpoint Protection Platform, Crowdstrike Threat Graph database for cybersecurity, Crowdstrike Zero Trust, and Humio for observability and log management.

Modules and specialized areas: Endpoint security, device control, firewall management, cloud security posture management (CSPM), container security, cloud workload protection (CWP), identity threat detection and protection, MDR, threat hunting, intrusion analysis, automated cyber threat intelligence, digital risk monitoring, security hygiene, vulnerability management, forensic cybersecurity, file integrity monitoring, and observability and log management. 

Services: Penetration testing, cloud security services, identity protection services, network monitoring services, MDR, threat hunting, managed digital risk protection, DFIR, endpoint recovery, managed security assessments, network security monitoring, customer support, user training, and user certifications.

Overall: Crowdstrike offers more platform solutions and specific cybersecurity modules to meet user needs. However, it offers fewer specialized industry verticals to users.

Breadth Depth Specialization Overall



Crowdstrike X X


SentinelOne works with partners across these four categories: the Singularity Marketplace, Technology Alliance Partners, Channel Partners, and Cyber Risk Partners. A key partnership is SentinelOne for AWS.

There are over 90 different partner organizations across the categories, according to their website. The partners are based in various countries: the U.S., France, U.K., Singapore, Canada, Israel, South Africa, Netherlands, Hong Kong, Italy, Germany, Australia, and Sri Lanka.

Crowdstrike offers partnerships in several categories: Store Partners, Technology Partners, Solution Provider Partners, Cloud Partners, Service Partners, and Embedded OEM Partners. Their largest partnerships are with Red Hat, Verizon Alliance, EY Alliance, Amazon Web Services (AWS), and Google Cloud.

There are over 100 Crowdstrike partners in four global regions: the Americas, EMEA, Asia Pacific, and Japan, according to their website.

Breadth Depth Specialization Global reach Overall



Crowdstrike X X X


Learn more about top cloud providers and partners: AWS vs. Azure vs. Google Cloud: Cloud Platform Comparison

SentinelOne has worked with a variety of customers and industries to implement security solutions, primarily working to protect distributed endpoints. Some specialized industry verticals from SentinelOne include energy, manufacturing, and both K-12 and higher education.

Featured customers: Samsung, Aston Martin, Sysco, Pandora, TGI Fridays, O’Neill, Shutterfly, Hitachi, Cengage, Norwegian Airlines, State of Montana, The Kelsey-Seybold Clinic.

Industry verticals: Energy, federal government, finance, health care, higher education, K-12 education, manufacturing, retail.

Crowdstrike primarily supports a handful of focused industries as they develop and deploy security solutions. Their support extends across several security needs, including endpoint protection, identity protection, managed hunting, partner solutions, proactive services, and threat intelligence.

Featured customers: Goldman Sachs, Commercial Bank of Qatar, Virgin Hyperloop, Magna, State of Arizona, Ashland University, Bionexo, Cushman & Wakefield, City of Las Vegas, Jemena, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Formula One Team, Inductive Automation.

Industry verticals: Finance, retail, election security, public sector solutions, and health care.

Breadth Depth Specialization Overall

SentinelOne X




SentinelOne primarily receives positive customer reviews, with many customers citing its real-time monitoring and behavioral analytics, machine learning (ML)-powered insights, and the accessibility of the user interface. Across four major customer rating and review sites, SentinelOne receives an average rating of 4.7 out of 5.

Crowdstrike’s customer reviews are mostly positive. Many customers highlight the strength of customer support and documentation, easy cloud installation and deployment, and zero trust for the platform. Across four major customer rating and review sites, SentinelOne receives an average rating of 4.6 out of 5. SentinelOne scores higher than Crowdstrike in customer ratings by less than 0.1.

Capterra TrustRadius G2 Gartner Peer Insights Overall

SentinelOne 4.7/5 9.2/10 4.7/5 4.8/5 4.7/5

Crowdstrike 4.7/5 9.1/10 4.7/5 4.8/5 4.6/5

SentinelOne has won awards across technical, customer, and workplace categories of excellence. Some of its most significant recent recognitions include:

Highest Overall Rating in the 2023 Gartner “Voice of the Customer” report for endpoint protection platforms 

A top score in the 2023 MITRE “Enginuity ATT&CK Evaluation” for 100% visibility delivery 

Leader in the 2023 Gartner “Magic Quadrant” for endpoint protection platforms

Several workplace awards by Comparably for

Best Company Culture, Best CEO, Best Company for Women, and Best Company for Diversity

Crowdstrike has won leadership and performance awards from several major IT and business recognition organizations, including IDC, Forrester, Gartner, SE Labs, and MITRE. Some of its most prestigious recognitions over the last couple of years include:

Leader in the IDC “Marketscape: Worldwide Modern Endpoint Security for Enterprise” 2023 vendor assessment

Leader placement in three different Forrester “Wave” categories for 2023

Leader, with the strongest completeness of vision score, in the 2023 Gartner “Magic Quadrant” for endpoint protection platforms (EPP) 

A top score in the 2023 MITRE “Enginuity ATT&CK Evaluations” with 100% detection coverage

Crowdstrike scores higher than most other competitors in the endpoint security space across several leading assessments, most notably, earning the strongest placement in the Gartner “Magic Quadrant” for 2023.

Volume Variety Significance Overall



Crowdstrike X


SentinelOne and Crowdstrike launched two years apart, in 2013 and 2011 respectively, and Crowdstrike has quickly pulled ahead to become a broader provider of endpoint security solutions. Crowdstrike also comes to its customers with a deeper portfolio, a wider and more experienced partner network, and several industry recognitions across product performance, growth, and workplace quality. Especially for companies that rely on cloud infrastructure, Crowdstrike brings cloud-based solutions that are trusted to perform for a variety of cybersecurity needs.

However, SentinelOne is a stronger performer in certain industry and technical categories that will meet some companies’ security needs better. The company takes more of a hybrid infrastructure approach to endpoint security, making SentinelOne a better solution for companies with legacy on-premises infrastructure. The company also focuses on more niche verticals, like energy and manufacturing.

Given how closely these two companies match across product capabilities and customer reviews, it’s essential for users to determine how much experience SentinelOne and Crowdstrike offer for their particular industry, global region, size, and particular use cases.

Portfolio Partners Use cases Ratings Recognition Overall



Crowdstrike X X


Learn about other top cybersecurity providers in the Cybersecurity Market.

You're reading Sentinelone Vs Crowdstrike: Endpoint Security Comparison

Apparmor Vs. Selinux Comprehensive Comparison

In world of cybersecurity, there are two commonly used tools for enforcing mandatory access control (MAC) policies on Linux systems: AppArmor and SELinux. Both of these tools provide a layer of security by limiting actions that a particular process or application can take on a system. In this article, we will be taking a comprehensive look at both AppArmor and SELinux and compare their features and capabilities.

Overview of AppArmor and SELinux

AppArmor and SELinux are both Linux security modules (LSMs) that can be used to protect a system from various security threats. They are designed to restrict actions of applications, processes, and users on a system. Both tools use MAC policies to determine what actions are allowed and what actions are not.

AppArmor was developed by Novell, and it was initially released in 2005. It is an LSM that is designed to be easy to use and deploy. AppArmor uses a profile-based approach to security, where each application has its own security profile. These profiles specify what actions an application can take, such as accessing certain files or network ports.

On other hand, SELinux was developed by US National Security Agency (NSA) and was first released in 2000. SELinux is a more complex LSM that uses a mandatory access control (MAC) policy. This policy specifies what actions are allowed on a system and what actions are not. Unlike AppArmor, SELinux is not profile-based, and it requires a lot of configuration to set up.

Ease of Use

One of major differences between AppArmor and SELinux is ease of use. AppArmor is designed to be easy to use and deploy, while SELinux is more complex and requires a lot of configuration.

AppArmor uses a profile-based approach to security, where each application has its own security profile. These profiles are easy to create and modify, making it simple to apply security policies to new applications. Additionally, AppArmor is easy to use because it is integrated with many Linux distributions, including Ubuntu, Debian, and OpenSUSE. This integration makes it simple to deploy AppArmor and start using it right away.

In contrast, SELinux is more complex and difficult to use. It requires a lot of configuration to set up, and it does not use a profile-based approach to security. Instead, SELinux uses a mandatory access control (MAC) policy, which specifies what actions are allowed on a system and what actions are not. This policy can be difficult to understand and configure, making SELinux a more challenging LSM to use.


Another important factor to consider when comparing AppArmor and SELinux is their performance. Both tools have an impact on system performance, but extent of that impact varies.

AppArmor is known for having a lower impact on system performance compared to SELinux. This is because AppArmor uses a profile-based approach to security, which is less complex than mandatory access control (MAC) policy used by SELinux. Additionally, AppArmor profiles can be compiled into kernel, which can reduce overhead of enforcing security policies.

On other hand, SELinux is known for having a higher impact on system performance compared to AppArmor. This is because SELinux uses a mandatory access control (MAC) policy, which is more complex than profile-based approach used by AppArmor. Additionally, SELinux policies cannot be compiled into kernel, which can result in higher overhead when enforcing security policies.


Flexibility is another factor to consider when comparing AppArmor and SELinux. Both tools have different levels of flexibility in terms of what actions they can restrict and how those restrictions are applied.

AppArmor is more flexible in terms of what actions it can restrict. This is because AppArmor uses a profile-based approach to security, which allows for granular control over what actions an application can take. This means that it is easy to restrict specific actions, such as accessing a particular file or network port, without affecting other actions that are allowed.

On other hand, SELinux is less flexible in terms of what actions it can restrict. This is because SELinux uses a mandatory access control (MAC) policy, which restricts all actions that are not explicitly allowed. This means that it can be difficult to restrict specific actions without also restricting other actions that are allowed.

However, SELinux is more flexible in terms of how restrictions are applied. SELinux policies can be customized to apply different levels of security based on context in which an application is running. This means that SELinux can provide stronger security in situations where it is needed, such as in a high-security environment.

Community Support

Community support is an important factor to consider when choosing a security tool. Both AppArmor and SELinux have active communities of users and developers, but there are differences in level of support available.

AppArmor has a large and active community of users and developers. It is integrated with many Linux distributions, including Ubuntu, Debian, and OpenSUSE. This means that there are many resources available for learning about AppArmor and getting help with any issues that may arise.

SELinux also has a large and active community of users and developers, but it is less integrated with Linux distributions. This means that it can be more difficult to get started with SELinux and find resources for learning about it.

AppArmor vs. SELinux in Table Format





No – audit2allow and system-config-selinux

Yes – Yast wizard

Powerful Policy Setup

Yes – Very complex


Default and Recommended integration



Training and Vendor Support

Yes – Redhat

Yes – Novell

Recommended for

Advanced Users

New/Advanced Users


Pathname based system does not require labelling or relabelling filesystem

Attaches labels to all files, processes and objects

Examples of AppArmor and SELinux in Action

To better understand how AppArmor and SELinux work in practice, here are some examples of how they can be used to enforce security policies on a Linux system.

Example 1: Restricting Access to Files

Suppose you have an application that needs to access a specific file on your Linux system. You want to restrict access to this file so that only application can access it.

With AppArmor, you can create a profile for application that specifies which files it is allowed to access. This profile can be easily modified to restrict access to specific file in question.

With SELinux, you can create a policy that allows application to access specific file in question, while restricting access to other files.

Example 2: Restricting Access to Network Ports

Suppose you have a server running on your Linux system that listens on a specific network port. You want to restrict access to this port so that only certain applications can connect to it.

With AppArmor, you can create a profile for server that specifies which network ports it is allowed to listen on. This profile can be easily modified to restrict access to specific port in question.

With SELinux, you can create a policy that allows server to listen on specific port in question, while restricting access to other ports.


In conclusion, both AppArmor and SELinux are powerful tools for enforcing mandatory access control (MAC) policies on Linux systems. AppArmor is designed to be easy to use and deploy, while SELinux is more complex and requires a lot of configuration to set up. AppArmor has a lower impact on system performance compared to SELinux, but SELinux is more flexible in terms of how restrictions are applied. Both tools have active communities of users and developers, but AppArmor is more integrated with Linux distributions. Ultimately, choice between AppArmor and SELinux depends on specific security requirements and constraints of your system.

4 Questions To Ask Before Investing In Endpoint Security Solutions

For a number of years, Federal IT managers have been helping agencies capitalize on the productivity benefits of mobile applications. The benefits can be significant: Frost & Sullivan found that smartphones are freeing up an average of 58 minutes of work time each day, for a productivity boost of 34 percent.

But mobility also comes with new security concerns that can keep IT leaders up at night. Mobile malware attacks rose last year to 42.7 million incidents, up from 40 million in 2023. The risks are especially high for the public sector. The security website DarkReading reports that government ranks second for the highest number of mobile malware attacks, behind only the financial services industry.

Protecting untethered devices is more costly and complicated than ever, as government data flows between everything from laptops, smartphones and tablets to newer endpoints like wearables and IoT sensors on tanks, aircraft and other operations equipment. More types of devices operating outside the protection of agency firewalls means increased attack surface area for security staffs to defend. It’s no wonder that IT officials name securing endpoints and improving breach recovery times the top mobile security priorities for the next 12-18 months, according to a recent study by FedScoop.

So even if new IT modernization funds materialize thanks to the Modernizing Government Technology Act, agencies must closely manage cybersecurity spending — both when evaluating legacy infrastructure and deploying new technologies.

How can you judge whether an endpoint solution is a wise investment? Start by answering these four critical questions.

Q1: Alignment. Does your mobile security approach align with your agency’s overall cybersecurity strategy?

Answer: Follow a standards-based approach. Look for mobile platforms that adhere to government-wide security standards, such as the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS), as published by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). They certify credentialing, key management and crypto-management capabilities. Platforms should also comply with the National Information Assurance Partnership (NIAP), which oversees evaluations of commercial IT products for use in national security systems.

Q2: Integration. Does your endpoint security solution seamlessly integrate with your overall cybersecurity environment?

Answer: Choose endpoint platforms that come with thousands of APIs for out-of-the-box “hooks” into existing security systems, such as mobile data management applications. This is essential for overcoming integration headaches and expenses associated with embedding mobile security within the larger cyber-defense foundation. Also look for platforms that let IT administrators efficiently set controls for virtual private networks and smart card frameworks, as well as one that provides single sign-on integration with Active Directory.

Digitize Your Government Agency

White Paper

Get this guide to drive collaboration, boost productivity and ensure security in the public sector. Download Now

Q3: Productivity. How can you maximize mobile productivity without sacrificing security?

Answer: IT managers must find the right balance between cyber risk and letting people do their jobs. Fortunately, that’s becoming easier than ever. The best endpoint platforms offer containerization for creating secure zones within mobile devices that clearly separate government and personal data and applications. This enables IT staff to encrypt and closely manage sensitive government assets, without impacting usability.

Passwords are one of the biggest productivity drains, causing users to constantly fumble for the right codes before connecting to government networks. However, workers can more easily stay productive when platforms provide biometric authentication, such as fingerprint reading and iris scanning, and sophisticated tools for continuous multifactor authentication and derived credentialing.

Q4: Culture. How can we get everyone to take security seriously?

Answer: Cultivate a culture of security. That’s not easy, as people understandably focus on their main responsibilities and see security as the IT department’s job. But this creates security gaps that hackers are ready to exploit. Infected email attachments opened by end users account for 66 percent of the malware installed at enterprises, according to Verizon’s 2023 Data Breach Investigations report. The report adds that stolen or weak passwords, often obtained by fooling end users into revealing them to bad actors, represent 81% of hacking-related breaches.

Regular end-user training can help close this gap by reinforcing agency security policies and keeping people updated about the latest exploits. The latest technology can also take some of the onus off of end users. For example, Samsung Knox can authenticate at the transaction level by verifying not only the person performing the transaction, but also the permission to perform it at that exact time and location. So if someone logs in from California at midday, and an hour later the same device is signing on from New York, security managers can see and respond to the threat before it causes harm.

As end-points proliferate in the years ahead, hackers will likely focus more of their attention to finding and exploiting their vulnerabilities. Government security staff and federal IT administrators can address these threats — and sleep soundly — with the latest end-point protection platforms.

Learn how Samsung government solutions can help your agency update your mobile environment to make it more secure — today and tomorrow.

Amazon Chime Vs Skype: Detailed Comparison

Amazon Chime vs Skype: Feature Breakdown 1. Calling Features

Both the Amazon Chime, and Skype, offer some really great calling features. Adding contacts is easy in Amazon Chime, but not so much in Skype (at least, I’ve never found Skype to be particularly good at this). Once you’ve added your contacts, calling them is easy on both Amazon Chime, and Skype, and both the services have equally good audio quality, so you can’t go wrong with either choice. However, there is one place where Skype leaves Amazon Chime in the dust: calling phone numbers. It’s not always a given, that the person you need to contact is on the same application as you are, which is where Skype’s competitively priced calling rates really knock it out of the park.

When it comes to video calls, both the Amazon Chime, and Skype are great performers. The quality of video calls are as good as expected, and stable. It’s important to note that if you’re using Chime on an unstable connection, it will refuse to launch the video. However, you will still be able to connect on voice call.

2. Screen Sharing

In Amazon Chime, you can even request to control the other user’s screen remotely. This will definitely come in handy in meetings, and video calls where you’re trying to make plans, etc. Meanwhile, even though Skype allows Screen Sharing for free, you can subscribe to one of the paid plans for Skype for Business, to be able to remotely control another user’s screen.

3. Record Meetings

To get this feature in Skype, you will have to subscribe to one of the “Skype for Business” plans, which is not a big deal, because the recording feature that Amazon Chime offers is a part of the “Amazon Chime Pro plan”, which will cost you almost $15 per month, per user. Also, Skype for Business can record audio, as well as video, something that Amazon Chime can’t do (yet).

4. Share Documents and Media

Both Skype, and Amazon Chime come with the capability to share documents, and media. Although, being oriented towards both consumers, and enterprises, one would expect Amazon Chime to have more options for sharing documents, and media. However, as it turns out, Skype offers a lot more flexibility when it comes to they types of files you can send. With Skype, you can send documents, and images, as well as contacts, location, and video messages. However, Amazon Chime only lets users send documents, or media (such as images).

5. Instant and Scheduled Meetings

Since Amazon Chime is aimed primarily at enterprises, it includes a host of powerful meeting features; something that is present in Skype for Business, as well. However, personally, I find the intuitive way in which Amazon Chime works, much better than Skype.

Instant Meetings start at the very same moment. You simply select the people you want to invite, and the meeting starts off. Invitees get notifications that they’re invited to a meeting, and they can join, decline, or send a message if they’re running late.

Scheduled Meetings, on the other hand, are made by creating a meeting in the calendar application of your choice, and adding invitees. Amazon Chime also gives you some important information that you have to add in the description for the meeting, so the invitees can attend it. This information contains various methods to connect to the meeting, and every invitee can choose to connect whichever way they prefer.

Amazon Chime offers very clear instructions about how to create a scheduled meeting, so you don’t really have to worry about anything, except following the instructions.

FeatureAmazon Chime BasicAmazon Chime PlusAmazon Chime ProSkype FreeSkype for Business

Voice CallingYes, 1:1YesYesYes, up to 25Yes

Video CallingYes, 1:1YesYesYes, up to 25Yes

Screen SharingNoYesYesYesYes

Remote ControlNoYesYesNoYes

Record Meeting AudioNoNoYesNoYes

Record Meeting VideoNoNoNoNoYes

Share Documents and MediaYesYesYesYesYes

Share Location, ContactsNoNoNoYesYes

Amazon Chime vs Skype: Platform Availability

Platform Availability is a very important factor when it comes to apps that offer online meeting features. After all, not every one in a company will be using the same platform, which is why it’s important to support at least the most popular platforms – another area where Skype fares much better than Amazon Chime.

Amazon Chime is available on Android, iOS, Windows, and macOS. It can also be used in the browser itself, if need be.

Skype, on the other hand, is available on Android, iOS, Windows Phone, BlackBerry, Windows, macOS, and Linux. Plus, it can be used on a browser, as well.

Amazon Chime vs Skype: Pricing and Plans 1. Amazon Chime

Amazon Chime offers 3 plan options for you to choose from:

Amazon Chime Basic (Free): This is the free tier of the Amazon Chime service, and will only let you make 1:1 audio, and video calls. You will also get access to chats, and chat rooms on all your devices

Amazon Chime Plus ($2.50 per user, per month): The Amazon Chime Plus plan comes with all the features of Amazon Chime Basic, along with support for screen sharing, and a host of IT management tools.

Amazon Chime Pro ($15 per user, per month): The highest tier in the Amazon Chime service, this plan offers all the features of Amazon Chime Plus, and adds the ability to record meetings, get personalized meeting URLs, and the ability to join meetings with a standard phone line.

2. Skype for Business

Skype is divided into two different categories: Skype, and Skype for Business. Skype is free to use, and doesn’t require any subscription. However, Skype for Business has two tiers:

Office 365 Business Essentials ($5 per user per month): This is the most affordable tier of the two, and offers audio, HD video, and web conferencing, along with the ability to share your presentations, and transfer control to other members, schedule meetings, and do a lot more.

Amazon Chime vs Skype: Use Cases

If you’re planning on using the free version of Skype, you should know that it only supports up to 25 people, and doesn’t really incorporate meetings in the traditional way. Of course, you can still use it as an online meeting application, but for real productivity, you’ll do better if you subscribed to one of the “Skype for Business” plans that Microsoft offers.

Amazon Chime, on the other hand, can only be used as a meeting application with one of the paid subscriptions. The free tier only includes 1:1 video calling, which makes the “Amazon Chime Basic” plan rather meek when it comes to remote, online meetings for enterprises. However, if you subscribe to the “Amazon Chime Plus”, or “Pro” plans, you’ll get access to a host of great features for your enterprise.

To sum it up, if you’re looking for a casual video calling application, you can use Skype, or the “Amazon Chime Basic” plan. However, I would recommend using Skype, because it allows video conferencing between a maximum of 25 people. After all, you wouldn’t always use a casual video conferencing application for just video calling with one single person at a time.

However, if you’re looking for an enterprise solution for your online meetings, I think the “Amazon Chime Pro” plan has a lot of potential in it. After all, it is based on the AWS cloud infrastructure, which is one of the best enterprise cloud computing solutions there are. Plus, I personally find the Amazon Chime app much easier to understand, and use. For what it’s worth, though, the Skype for Business app can also serve you well, when it comes to enterprise solutions for online meetings, so the choice is entirely yours to make.

SEE ALSO: 10 Best Skype Bots You Should Use

Amazon Chime: Truly a Skype Competitor?

Comparison: Apple Homepod Vs Google Home Vs Amazon Echo

Comparison: Apple HomePod Vs Google Home Vs Amazon Echo Apple HomePod Vs Google Home Vs Amazon Echo 1. Apple HomePod

Apple HomePad is one of the newest smart speakers among Google Home and Amazon echo. This device is set up with Siri and other Apple smart devices. This smart speaker was launched in the US back in 2023 and about to launch in India as well. HomePod comes with seven speakers(tweeter) and a dedicated woofer setup (for custom amplifier) as well. With the superior sound quality, you can command Siri from anywhere (like from a room or living area) and she will hear your voice commands. Some of the Pros and Cons of Apple HomePod are:

Built-in Apple Music integration

High fidelity audio quality

Apple’s focus on privacy

Compatible with HomeKit

Ambient Siri for digital assistant


Only compatible with Apple devices

No Bluetooth compatibility

No Alexa or Google Assistant

Need to AirPlay other music streaming services

2. Google Home

One of the most iconic smart speakers from Google. This device enables users to speak through voice commands to interact through Google Assistant. You can use this smart speaker in a house with third-party integrated service which allows users to control playback of photos and videos, listen to music or receive any new updates through Google Assistant. Google Home (Google Nest devices) has integrated support for home automation through which you can control your home appliances(smart) with your voice command. Some of the Pros and Cons of Google Home are:


Can cast a video to your TV, identify differently voices, cast audio to multiple devices.

Supports Google Play Music and YouTube Music.

Ability to answer all questions and pretty good sound quality.

Customizable appearance and Aesthetic design.

Bluetooth audio streaming and works with Spotify accounts.


Can’t read or send emails and messages.

Firmware and features updates are not available to all regions.

Lags in third-party support when compared to Amazon Echo.

Lacks physical buttons on the top of the device and doesn’t have an audio out port.

No intercom feature and doesn’t hear from a distance too.

3. Amazon Echo

Amazon Echo (3rd Gen) is a highly affordable smart speaker as compare to Apple HomePod and Google Home. With decent audio quality and 360-degree speakers (Dolby-digital), Alexa is pretty capable in digital assistant and fully integrated with your Amazon account. This device is compatible with all smartphones and smart home devices like controlling your home smart lights, music streaming services, etc. Command Alexa to play music and tell her to play music from different music streaming services includes Apple and Amazon music, add items to your shopping list and many more. Some of the Pros and Cons of the Amazon Echo are:


Integrates with your Amazon account

Compatible with iOS and Android

Works with Apple Music, Spotify, Pandora, etc. with skills

Very affordable

Lets you call and message others


Privacy concerns

Audio quality is not as good compared to HomePod and Google Home

Apple services are not built-in

Comparison Table

Apple HomePad Google Home Amazon Echo

Assistant Siri Google Assistant Alexa

Music Support Apple Music Google Play Music, Spotify Premium, YouTube Music, Pandora, iHeartRadio, TuneIn Amazon Music, Prime Music, Amazon Music Unlimited, Spotify Premium, Pandora, TuneIn, iHeartRadio, Audible

Multi-room Yes with AirPlay 2 Yes with Chromecast Audio Yes, with multiple Echo speakers

Smart Home & third-party support Yes, through HomeKit only Yes Yes

Microphones 6 far-field +

1 low-frequency calibration microphone

2 far-field 7 far-field

Speakers 7x tweeter + woofer 2-inch driver + 2x 2-inch passive radiators 0.6-inch tweeter + 2.5-inch woofer

Connectivity Wi-Fi

(Bluetooth currently unknown)

Bluetooth & Wi-Fi Bluetooth & Wi-Fi

Dimensions and Weight 172 x 142mm


142.8 x 96.4mm


148 x 88mm


Price $299 $99 $74.99


Since the above three are best in smart speakers and I will go with Google Home(personally) as Google is better sounding and great compatibility with all smartphones despite these two (Apple HomePod and Amazon Echo). Google home is easily customizable and easy to use with Chromecast as well. If you want a decent one in terms of price and sound, then the Amazon Echo is best. And if you are very much concerned about the privacy, Apple HomePod will deliver beyond your expectations.

Editor’s Recommendation:

Shape-up Your Life With These Google Assistant Settings

Ways To Quickly Fix “OK Google Not Working”

It’s Raining Smart Home Products at CES 2023

Quick Reaction:

About the author

Pranay Mathur

Linux Concerns: Convenience Vs. Security

Ask why you should use Linux, and inevitably someone will claim that it is more secure than Windows, and doesn’t need anti-virus protection, either.

Such claims sound like a wish-fulfillment, promising computing without the precautions that that have become routine in the last two decades. The only trouble is, they are half-truths at best. Like any operating system, Linux is only as secure as you make it — and the current trend is to choose convenience over security.

Once upon a recent time, Linux was more secure than it is today. Only the root user could mount external device, and in many distributions new users were automatically assigned a few groups that limited the hardware they could access. Distributions followed the principle of least privilege (aka least access), under which users, applications, and devices receive only the access to the system that they absolutely require.

Applying least privilege makes for a securer system, which is where Linux gained its reputation. However, a secure system is often an inconvenient system, and hopes of desktop domination put pressure on distributions to match the convenience of Windows. The problem was not so much that increased popularity encourages the writing of viruses and malware as that the hope of popularity encouraged the relaxation of security standards in dozens of little ways.

A few changes had mixed results. For example, the rise of Ubuntu introduced the use of sudo, which helps to reduce the amount of time that the root user is loged in. But, as implemented, it can make possible the control of a system from multiple accounts, which means that Ubuntu simultaneously increases and decreases security. More often, though, the changes were in the name of being as convenient as Window, with the cumulative effect.

Many of these relaxations were minor in themselves, such as allowing anyone to reboot the system or burn a DVD or to install extensions to software like Firefox or Vim for their personal use. However, the cumulative effect is that Linux’s reputation for security is less true today for most distributions. While complete control of the system is still likely to involve social engineering — that is, deceiving a user — personal accounts today are easier than ever to compromise.

Mobile and Cloud Compromises

In the last few years, the preference for convenience has accelerated even more with the rise of mobile devices and cloud services.

You might imagine that Android, being a Linux derivative, is secure, but as phones and tablets are shipped, nothing could be farther from the truth. Most mobile devices ship with so little security that it takes hours of work to set up the basics. Even then, between the free services that come with the device and the apps that you install, you can quickly have two dozen outsider organizations with access to your device.

The overwhelming majority of these outsiders are benign, of course. To think otherwise would be paranoid. Yet the fact remains that they are strangers, and you have absolutely no idea of how well they secure the data that they store or their access to your device. From a security perspective, the arrangement is simply not a good idea. The difference is that when you follow basic security steps, you know your system is as trustworthy as you can make it, while on a mobile device, you simply have to trust that a stranger is doing their best for you.

Put in those terms, common modern practice sounds as naive as it actually is. Yet, with the rise of Chromebooks, the triumph of convenience goes one step further. Instead of checking for malware yourself, you are invited to trust the manufacturer to scan your system for you — a useful convenience, so long as the manufacturer never hires a careless or a malicious employee.

The point is, when you allow a service to access your system, you can have no idea who you are giving access to. But the convenience is so great that few of us stop to imagine the tradeoffs that can be involved, even with the best of intentions on both sides.

The High-Wire Act

Realizing the extent of convenience’s victory over security, you can easily become paranoid — all the more so because your reaction is justified. Give your reaction full range, and you might quickly end up working only on a computer that has no Internet connection, and is stored down a mine shaft with three layers of security guards between it and the rest of the world.

In other words, favoring security as much as convenience is currently favored is simply going from one extreme to another, and no solution at all. The trick is to find a balance between security and convenience that allows you to get your work done.

Fortunately, there is no shortage of information online about how to strike this balance. Security hardening tools and tips for your workstation are everywhere. For mobile devices and cloud services, you can store your data encrypted, or, as Tahoe-LAFS allows, store your data in pieces across multiple clouds, so that it has to be re-assembled to use. Instead of using someone else’s cloud storage, you can create your own with ownCloud.

With mobile devices themselves, you should seriously consider rooting — altering them so that you have root access. Voided warranties and bricked devices are a possibility — or were once — but rooting remains the only way you can be completely sure of securing your mobile device. Given today’s security standards, rooting is not just a clever bit of hacking, or a technological accomplishment, but, increasingly, a necessity.

Yes, such actions take effort. In particular, you should not consider rooting until you have thoroughly investigated the possibilities on your device. But restoring basic security seems worth the effort. You may choose not to revert to the security standards of the past, but with a little effort you can do far, far better than the modern norms.

Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.

Update the detailed information about Sentinelone Vs Crowdstrike: Endpoint Security Comparison on the website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!