We performed a comparison between ArcSight Logger and Devo based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We check a lot of logs in ArcSight Logger because we're running a massive database platform."
"ArcSight provides the basic information that we want."
"ArcSight's robustness is its most valuable feature."
"It's a brilliant log collection tool, and it can handle hundreds of thousands of servers in a single shot to ingest the data."
"We have a trigger. So, Logger automatically blocks these IP addresses. We could have Logger put them on a blacklist."
"It is one of the best products available in the market."
"In terms of ArcSight Logger's most valuable feature, it is their scalability. ArcSight's real advantage is its scalability because they have two layers, including the logger layer."
"Some of the most valuable features I really appreciate are the performance, how quick the solution is, and how easy it is to create a query."
"Devo has a really good website for creating custom configurations."
"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."
"It's very, very versatile."
"Even if it's a relatively technical tool or platform, it's very intuitive and graphical. It's very appealing in terms of the user interface. The UI has a graphically interface with the raw data in a table. The table can be as big as you want it, depending on your use case. You can easily get a report combining your data, along with calculations and graphical dashboards. You don't need a lot of training, because the UI is relatively very intuitive."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"The solution should make it possible to integrate network analysis features."
"It is really difficult to work in ArcSight Logger, as it is very slow."
"I think the ArcSight team should try to simplify legacy products for the customers, because that product is not easy to use or to work with. It needs more more competency or appeal to use. We hope Micro Focus is trying to resolve this."
"I had some latency issues for two months. I had to increase our storage capacity significantly to reduce the latency."
"The initial setup was a little bit complex."
"The product's connectors should work better and the user manuals need an update."
"The integration with other systems could be improved."
"We find that the search and access functionality is quite slow."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"The biggest area with room for improvement in Devo is the Security Operations module that just isn't there yet. That goes back to building out how they're going to do content and larger correlation and aggregation of data across multiple things, as well as natively ingesting CTI to create rule sets."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."
"Devo has a lot of cloud connectors, but they need to do a little bit of work there. They've got good integrations with the public cloud, but there are a lot of cloud SaaS systems that they still need to work with on integrations, such as Salesforce and other SaaS providers where we need to get access logs."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
ArcSight Logger is ranked 20th in Log Management with 31 reviews while Devo is ranked 26th in Log Management with 21 reviews. ArcSight Logger is rated 7.8, while Devo is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ArcSight Logger writes "A scalable and stable solution that enables users to see all the event logs in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". ArcSight Logger is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Wazuh and Graylog, whereas Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Datadog. See our ArcSight Logger vs. Devo report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Log Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
