We performed a comparison between Cyware Security Orchestration Layer and IBM Resilient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, Splunk and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)."The native integration of the Microsoft security solution has been essential because it helps reduce some false positives, especially with some of the impossible travel rules that may be configured in Microsoft 365. For some organizations, that might be benign because they're using VPNs, etc."
"I've worked on most of the top SIEM solutions, and Sentinel has an edge in most areas. For example, it has built-in SOAR capabilities, allowing you to run playbooks automatically. Other vendors typically offer SOAR as a separate licensed solution or module, but you get it free with Sentinel. In-depth incident integration is available out of the box."
"It has basic out-of-the-box integrations with multiple log sources."
"The analytics has a lot of advantages because there are 300 default use cases for rules and we can modify them per our environment. We can create other rules as well. Analytics is a useful feature."
"The scalability is great. You can put unlimited logs in, as long as you can pay for it. There are commitment tiers, up to six terabytes per day, which is nowhere close to what any one of our customers is running."
"It has a lot of great features."
"The initial setup is very simple and straightforward."
"The pricing of the product is excellent."
"The technical support team is helpful."
"IBM Resilient is scalable."
"The most valuable thing about it is how easy it is to navigate the user interface."
"As a whole, the product is stable...Technical support is very good."
"The solution is reliable in our usage."
"The product is very good at incident response."
"What I like most about IBM Resilient is that it has a complete stack, which means you don't need to use different OEM products because you have all you need under the IBM Resilient umbrella. You don't need to worry much about integrations and components because you're working with tested and proven architecture."
"This is a good solution that we recommend for customers."
"It's really simple and has a flexible interface."
"The solution could be more user-friendly; some query languages are required to operate it."
"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."
"Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise."
"Improvement-wise, I would like to see more integration with third-party solutions or old-school antivirus products that have some kind of logging capability. I wouldn't mind having that exposed within Sentinel. We do have situations where certain companies have bought licensing or have made an investment in a product, and that product will be there for the next two or three years. To be able to view information from those legacy products would be great. We can then better leverage the Sentinel solution and its capabilities."
"Microsoft should improve Sentinel, considering that from the legacy systems, it cannot collect logs."
"There is some relatively advanced knowledge that you have to have to properly leverage Sentinel's full capabilities. I'm thinking about things like the creation of workbooks, how you do threat-hunting, and the kinds of notifications you're getting... It takes time for people to ramp up on that and develop a familiarity or expertise with it."
"Sentinel's reporting is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"The on-prem log sources still require a lot of development."
"The prices must be reduced."
"This product could be improved with better customization. This product isn't the best on the market like QRadar, but it's actually a good solution. However, some competitors' solutions contain more integration, support, automation, or flexibility."
"IBM Resilient is quite complex, including its configuration."
"IBM Resilient could integrate better with my tools."
"There are shortcomings with IBM Resilient's technical support team that can be considered for improvement in the future."
"The integration could be improved so that it is easy to integrate with other solutions."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The implementation could be a bit simpler."
"The product must provide more integration with other tools."
Cyware Security Orchestration Layer is ranked 21st in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 1 review while IBM Resilient is ranked 7th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 17 reviews. Cyware Security Orchestration Layer is rated 9.0, while IBM Resilient is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cyware Security Orchestration Layer writes "A stable solution with excellent features and a helpful technical support team". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Resilient writes "Simple deployment, scalable, but lacking third-party solution compatibility ". Cyware Security Orchestration Layer is most compared with , whereas IBM Resilient is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR, ServiceNow Security Operations, Fortinet FortiSOAR and IBM Security QRadar.
See our list of best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.