We performed a comparison between ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) and ThreatQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Recorded Future, Check Point Software Technologies, Microsoft and others in Threat Intelligence Platforms."The UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"You can fine-tune the SOAR and you'll be charged only when your playbooks are triggered. That is the beauty of the solution because the SOAR is the costliest component in the market today... but with Sentinel it is upside-down: the SOAR is the lowest-hanging fruit. It's the least costly and it delivers more value to the customer."
"The SOAR playbooks are Sentinel's most valuable feature. It gives you a unified toolset for detecting, investigating, and responding to incidents. That's what clearly differentiates Sentinels from its competitors. It's cloud-native, offering end-to-end coverage with more than 120 connectors. All types of data logs can be poured into the system so analysis can happen. That end-to-end visibility gives it the advantage."
"The automation feature is valuable."
"I like the KQL query. It simplifies getting data from the table and seeing the logs. All you need to know are the table names. It's quite easy to build use cases by using KQL."
"We’ve got process improvement that's happened across multiple different fronts within the organization, within our IT organization based on this tool being in place."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"Microsoft Sentinel comes preloaded with templates for teaching and analytics rules."
"The product automatically generated a threat score based on the maliciousness of an IP."
"The most valuable features are ease of use and the ability to customize it."
"It's a solid platform and is stable enough. It is not complicated and is easy to use."
"ThreatConnect has a highly user-friendly interface."
More ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) Pros →
"The reporting services are great. With reporting services, if you have customers that just visit a URL you can see the result - including why it's blocked and how and how the URL was first recognized as malicious."
"Integrating the solution with our existing security tools and workflows was easy."
"We'd like also a better ticketing system, which is older."
"The solution could be more user-friendly; some query languages are required to operate it."
"The solution could improve the playbooks."
"It could have a better API to be able to automate many things more extensively and get more extensive data and more expensive deployment possibilities. It can gain some points on the automation part and the integration part. The API is very limited, and I would like to see it extended a bit more."
"There is a wider thing called Jupyter Notebooks, which is around the automation side of things. It would be good if there are playbooks that you can utilize without having to have the developer experience to do it in-house. Microsoft could provide more playbooks or more Jupyter Notebooks around MITRE ATT&CK Framework."
"When we pass KPIs to the governance department, there's no option to provide rights to the data or dashboard to colleagues. We can use Power BI for this, but it isn't easy or convenient. They should just come up with a way to provide limited role-based access to auditing personnel"
"We do have in-built or out-of-the-box metrics that are shown on the dashboard, but it doesn't give the kind of metrics that we need from our environment whereby we need to check the meantime to detect and meantime to resolve an incident. I have to do it manually. I have to pull all the logs or all the alerts that are fed into Sentinel over a certain period. We do this on a monthly basis, so I go into Microsoft Sentinel and pull all the alerts or incidents we closed over a period of thirty days."
"Sentinel can be used in two ways. With other tools like QRadar, I don't need to run queries. Using Sentinel requires users to learn KQL to run technical queries and check things. If they don't know KQL, they can't fully utilize the solution."
"Integration is an area that could use some improvement."
"They should make it a little bit easier to generate events and share them with the community"
"It would be good to have more feeds and more integrated sources for enrichment."
"I couldn’t get any training videos online when I was working with the tool."
More ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) Cons →
"The solution should be simpler for the end-user in terms of reporting and navigating the product."
"The tool is not user-friendly."
More ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) Pricing and Cost Advice →
ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) is ranked 4th in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 4 reviews while ThreatQ is ranked 12th in Threat Intelligence Platforms with 2 reviews. ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) is rated 8.0, while ThreatQ is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) writes "The tool could be integrated into any environment, but it was expensive, and the deployment process was complex". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatQ writes "Improves the threat intelligence gathering process, but it is not user-friendly". ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) is most compared with Anomali ThreatStream, Recorded Future, Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Anomali Match and Splunk SOAR, whereas ThreatQ is most compared with Anomali ThreatStream, Recorded Future and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR.
See our list of best Threat Intelligence Platforms vendors and best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.
We monitor all Threat Intelligence Platforms 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.
