AWS vs. Azure vs. Google Cloud: A Security Feature Comparison

When comparing the security offerings of AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud, it’s essential to go beyond listing features and understand where each cloud excels. Depending on your organization’s specific security needs—whether focused on identity management, encryption, compliance, or advanced threat detection—one platform may clearly stand out.

Cloud environments face various threats, from misconfigurations to unauthorized access and data breaches. A strong security mindedness not only mitigates these risks but also ensures compliance with industry regulations. 

Each cloud provider offers a robust suite of tools, but the differences in their approaches needs to be assessed vs your overall cloud and application security strategy, alongside the primary sources of security threats and concerns for your engineering stack. Similarly, each application has its own unique requirements for data, infrastructure, and runtime security. 

In this article, we’ll compare the various cloud security capabilities across AWS, Azure, and GCP to help you find the best cloud provider for your unique security needs.

The Core Domains of Cloud Security

If we take a look at the core elements that comprise cloud security, they include:

• Identity and Access Management

• Encryption

• Network Security

• Monitoring & Threat intelligence

• Compliance 

Among the top three cloud providers we will take a look at in this blog post, there are some unique security features that each cloud offers as well, that may very well tip the scales in their favor.

In this post, we’ll take a head to head look at the security offering of AWS vs. Azure vs. Google Cloud, and help you make the decision which cloud is the right one for you based on your organization’s security needs.

Below is a quick TL;DR  comparison table that will help to sort the different cloud provider’s cloud security services into their cloud security categories.

Comparison Table

Below we will dive into each cloud security domain, and provide an overview of how each cloud provider stacks up and also the use case they excel at, and what to consider if this is the primary concern for your applications.

Identity and Access Management (IAM)

AWS provides a mature and granular IAM system with support for hierarchical account structures through AWS Organizations, which is particularly advantageous for managing complex environments with multiple teams or projects. In the words of AWS’ famed CTO, Werner Vogels (slightly paraphrased), “IAM is the single AWS service that touches every single aspect of the Everything Cloud.”

 Azure, however, shines in its deep integration with Microsoft ecosystems, using Azure Active Directory (Azure AD) as a central hub for identity and access management. Its Conditional Access feature enables advanced policies such as adaptive multi-factor authentication (MFA) based on user behavior and risk. 

Google Cloud’s IAM, while straightforward, stands out for its implementation of BeyondCorp Zero Trust, offering a modern approach to access without traditional VPNs.

• Best for centralized and hierarchical identity control: AWS. Use Case: Managing identities and permissions across multiple teams, accounts, or business units in a large enterprise.
• Best for Microsoft integration and adaptive policies: Azure. Use Case: Enterprises heavily reliant on Microsoft Office 365, Windows Server, or Active Directory, needing integrated security and policy enforcement.
• Best for organizations adopting Zero Trust models: Google Cloud. Use Case: Companies with a distributed workforce or those building modern SaaS platforms that require secure, remote access without VPN dependencies.

Encryption and Data Protection

All three providers offer strong encryption features, but the way they implement and manage encryption sets them apart. 

AWS leads with a robust Key Management Service (KMS) and comprehensive support for S3 Server-Side Encryption, making it ideal for industries with strict encryption requirements at scale. 

Azure provides Azure Key Vault and Azure Disk Encryption, both tightly integrated into its ecosystem, simplifying encryption for enterprises running on Windows or using Azure SQL databases. 

Google Cloud takes a different approach, encrypting all data at rest by default and offering Customer-Managed Encryption Keys (CMEK) for greater user control, making it a strong choice for privacy-conscious organizations.

• Best for large-scale encryption and granular key management: AWS. Use Case: Organizations managing large volumes of sensitive data across multiple applications, needing fine-grained control over encryption keys and robust scalability.
• Best for integration with enterprise ecosystems: Azure. Use Case: Enterprises running hybrid environments with a mix of on-premises and cloud infrastructure that rely on Windows and Microsoft tools.
• Best for privacy-first encryption by default: Google Cloud. Use Case: Organizations prioritizing stringent privacy regulations and requiring encryption for all data at rest by default without extensive configuration.

Network Security

AWS sets the standard with AWS Shield and Web Application Firewall (WAF) for DDoS protection and application-layer filtering, catering to businesses requiring always-on, high-availability network security. 

Azure offers Azure Firewall and DDoS Protection Standard, which integrate well with Azure-native services, making them seamless for Microsoft-centric architectures. 

Google Cloud’s network security tools—Cloud Armor and VPC Service Controls—stand out for their ability to enforce service-level boundaries and protect against large-scale DDoS attacks, particularly for web applications or APIs.

• Best for comprehensive DDoS protection and application-layer defense: AWS. Use Case: Organizations running high-traffic web applications or services requiring always-on DDoS protection and robust defense at the application layer.
• Best for Microsoft-centric network integration: Azure. Use Case: Enterprises with hybrid cloud environments that need seamless network integration between on-premises infrastructure and Azure cloud services.
• Best for API security and fine-grained network boundaries: Google Cloud. Use Case: Businesses developing and deploying API-driven applications that need strict access control and secure communication between services.

Threat Detection and Monitoring

AWS leads with its machine-learning-powered Amazon GuardDuty and detailed activity logging through AWS CloudTrail. These tools excel in environments requiring continuous threat detection and robust auditing. 

Azure brings in a competitive edge with Azure Security Center and Azure Sentinel, its SIEM solution that offers advanced analytics and integration with Microsoft’s threat intelligence network. 

Google Cloud uses its expertise in AI with Google Chronicle for threat intelligence and Security Command Center for proactive monitoring, making it the go-to for organizations prioritizing AI-driven insights.

• Best for real-time threat detection and logging: AWS. Use Case: Organizations needing continuous threat monitoring and robust logging capabilities to detect and respond to suspicious activity in real time.
• Best for SIEM integration and analytics: Azure. Use Case: Enterprises requiring a centralized Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solution to analyze and correlate security data from cloud and on-premises environments.
• Best for AI-driven threat detection and insights: Google Cloud. Use Case: Organizations prioritizing advanced AI-driven insights for proactive threat detection and root cause analysis.

Compliance

AWS boasts an extensive range of certifications (e.g., GDPR, SOC 2, HIPAA) and global availability, making it a strong contender for industries with high compliance demands. 

Azure differentiates itself by offering strong regional compliance tools, with solutions tailored to meet local data sovereignty laws. 

Google Cloud emphasizes privacy-centric certifications like GDPR and CCPA, excelling in jurisdictions with stringent data privacy regulations.

• Best for global compliance and industry certifications: AWS. Use Case: Organizations operating across multiple countries and industries requiring a broad spectrum of global compliance certifications.
• Best for regional and localized compliance needs: Azure. Use Case: Enterprises with strict data sovereignty requirements or industry-specific regulations in specific regions or countries.
• Best for privacy-focused compliance frameworks: Google Cloud. Use Case: Organizations prioritizing privacy-centric regulations and frameworks, such as GDPR or CCPA, to protect sensitive personal data.

Which Platform is Best Based on Your Security Needs?

• If you need granular control over access, strong encryption at scale, and global compliance: AWS is the clear choice. It’s ideal for enterprises managing complex environments or operating in highly regulated industries.

• If your organization runs on Microsoft products or needs strong SIEM capabilities: Azure provides seamless integration and analytics, making it the best fit for Windows-based enterprises or teams leveraging Microsoft’s ecosystem.

• If you prioritize a Zero Trust model, privacy, and AI-driven threat detection: Google Cloud offers cutting-edge tools and compliance tailored to modern security practices, making it an excellent option for innovative startups or privacy-focused industries.

Ultimately, the right choice comes down to your business goals, regulatory requirements, and technical needs. As businesses increasingly adopt multi-cloud or hybrid strategies, relying solely on a single provider’s security features is rarely sufficient. 

The diversity of frameworks, clouds, and compliance requirements demands a vendor-agnostic open ASPM (Application Security Posture Management) approach to unify security across platforms. Jit aims to deliver exactly that—a proactive security management platform that integrates seamlessly with AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud to enhance your overall security posture. 

By offering a unified and developer-friendly interface, it becomes less of a cognitive load to manage security across diverse environments without compromising on compliance or control.