We performed a comparison between SailPoint IdentityIQ and Securonix Next-Gen SIEM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about SailPoint, One Identity, Omada and others in User Provisioning Software."Access certification and provisioning are two of the solutions most valuable features."
"It is a scalable product."
"The tool's GUI is user-friendly."
"The solution is very good at the management of the identity lifecycle."
"It significantly reduces the workload for certification processes."
"SailPoint IdentityIQ has a good and straightforward user interface. They also have a lot of resources and documentation available to understand the process."
"SailPoint has allowed us to ensure the right people have the right access and to the rights things."
"User provisioning and the role management features are good."
"The most valuable feature is being able to look at users' behavioral profiles to see what they typically access. One of the key events that we monitor is people's downloading of objects... It's very easy to see people's patterns, what they typically do."
"The feature that is most valuable is the fact that it's an open platform, so it allows us to modify policies and tune policies as needed. There's also a feature called Data Insights which allows us to create different dashboards on specific things of interest for us."
"There aren't any positive aspects of the solution. It was a complete failure. There are no redeeming features."
"The big data security analytics platform, structured and unstructured data analytics, and user and entity behavior analytics provided by the product are probably the best in the industry."
"The solution is stable and scalable."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is their analytics platform where they have the open security data-link, which they introduced. This is typically different from the other vendors."
"SNYPR has a bundle of features. It has the UEBA feature that tells you about the behavior of a person or entity. In the tool itself, there is an incident management feature, which is definitely valuable."
"One of the most valuable features it has is the thread chaining. One of the common issues that we always had was the number of anomalies that we used to get and the number of alerts that we used to get. But with this approach of thread chaining, we've found the false-positive rate has decreased very significantly. That was something that we never could have achieved before."
"Certifications could include additional access levels or practices."
"The mover process for this solution could be improved."
"The UI needs to be more user friendly. More concentration on historical policy violations would be great. In terms of new features, I would like to see artificial intelligence and machine language added."
"It tends to be more expensive, but at the end of the day, it works."
"Regarding the scope for improvement in the solution, reporting is an area that can be a bit more UI-oriented."
"Scalability is hard, especially when you are doing it in real time."
"The user interface could be slightly improved. It could be made simpler and more user-friendly, however, it is good enough right now."
"The solution, in general, is quite expensive."
"The analytics-driven approach for finding sophisticated threats and reducing false positives is positive and good, but the platform requires a more dynamic concept. Everything is a bit static."
"The pricing. I'm not sure how they are proceeding with the identity based pricing compared with DB pricing which most of the vendors are using today."
"Sometimes, there is instability in the data in terms of the customization of the time. I have sometimes observed discrepancies in the data, which is something they should work on. They should bring more stability to time customization. If we are seeing a particular data, when we change the time zone, there should be the same data. There should not be any discrepancy."
"There is slight room for improvement in terms of the initial deployment. What I see is that Securonix is more focused on their product. They are expanding, in a big way, the number of customers. So there has to be a number of dedicated teams to jump on and speed up the deployment process."
"Sometimes, the injectors lag and are not loading. It would be nice if that could be improved."
"Securonix implements risk scores based on different policies that are triggered. We've seen some challenges with the risk scores and how they trigger. These are things that Securonix has recognized and they've been working with us to help improve things."
"We have a lot of users who, because they're engineers and they're bringing down product data - where, at times, a top-level product could be 10,000 or 15,000 objects - it's difficult for us to determine what should be a concern and what shouldn't be a concern. We work with the Securonix folks to try to come up with better ways to identify that."
"Regarding the analysis of security events on the SOC side, Securonix Next-Gen SIEM needs to improve its automation capabilities."
SailPoint IdentityIQ is ranked 1st in User Provisioning Software with 61 reviews while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 27 reviews. SailPoint IdentityIQ is rated 8.2, while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of SailPoint IdentityIQ writes "Flexible, easy to customize, and not too difficult to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". SailPoint IdentityIQ is most compared with Saviynt, One Identity Manager, Microsoft Entra ID, ForgeRock and Microsoft Identity Manager, whereas Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Exabeam Fusion SIEM.
We monitor all User Provisioning Software 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.