We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiSOAR and SECDO Platform 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 main benefit is the ease of integration."
"It is quite efficient. It helps our clients in identifying their security issues and respond quickly. Our clients want to automate incident response and all those things."
"The automation rules and playbooks are the most useful that I've seen. A number of other places segregate the automation and playbook as separate tools, whereas Microsoft is a SIEM and SOAR tool in one."
"The connectivity and analytics are great."
"Sentinel has features that have helped improve our security poster. It helped us in going ahead and identifying the gaps via analysis and focusing on the key elements."
"The analytic rule is the most valuable feature."
"The log analysis is excellent; it can predict what can or will happen regarding use patterns and vulnerabilities."
"The Identity Behavior tab furnishes us with the entire history linked to each IP or domain that has either accessed or attempted to access our system."
"The product can be automated for network security purposes. The solution offers a great security automation response."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiSOAR is the playbook, which has to be defined to apply the policies."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The reputation of the brand is very good."
"The solution is easy to implement and includes 450 built-in connectors."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR is a very interactive and user-friendly solution."
"We use the product for security."
"The good news is that FortiSOAR is not hard to maintain. If you prepared well and deployed strong initially, then maintenance will take half an hour every other week, not more than that. A single person can do it."
"The ease of deployment is a valuable feature."
"Technical support is great. Palo Alto is extremely helpful and responsive."
"It basically automates the entire alert investigation process."
"Sentinel's alerts and notifications are not fully optimized for mobile devices. The overall reporting and the analytics processes for the end user should also be improved. Also, the compatibility and availability of data sources and reports are not always perfect."
"Sentinel still has some anomalies. For example, sometimes when we write a query for log analysis with KQL, it doesn't give us the data in a proper way... Also, the fields or columns could be improved. Sometimes, it is not giving the desired results and there is a blank field."
"The built-in SOAR is not really good out-of-the-box. The SOAR relies on logic apps and you almost need to have some kind of developer background to be able to make these logic apps. Most security people cannot develop anything..."
"They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us."
"The playbook development environment is not as rich as it should be. There are multiple occasions when we face problems while creating the playbook."
"The learning curve could be improved. I am still learning it. We were able to implement the basic features to get them up and running, but there are still so many things that I don't know about all its features. They have a lot of features that we have not been able to use or apply. If they could work on reducing the solution's learning curve, that would be good. While there is a training course held by Microsoft to learn more about this solution, there is a cost associated with it."
"The reporting could be more structured."
"I think the number one area of improvement for Sentinel would be the cost."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR's dashboard is not easy to understand."
"The UI design of the solution needs to be changed since it can get difficult for a newbie to operate."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR should improve its analysis."
"Fortinet's tech support overall is not great when they are at their best."
"Fortinet FortiSOAR should add more documentation for some use cases."
"The area that needs improvement is integration with multiple third-party vendors."
"The solution doesn't connect well with the network devices."
"The technology and integrations are important so should continue to be enhanced."
"Many will try to use this as an out-of-the-box solution, however, it needs to be configured to fit what a company would like to do with it."
"Maybe the notifications setting could use a simpler setting."
"The price should be reduced in order to be more competitive in the market."
Earn 20 points
Fortinet FortiSOAR is ranked 10th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 12 reviews while SECDO Platform is ranked 9th in Security Incident Response. Fortinet FortiSOAR is rated 7.4, while SECDO Platform is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiSOAR writes "A stable solution that has a number of available connectors and is simple to automate". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SECDO Platform writes "Great documentation, good technical support, and very in-depth". Fortinet FortiSOAR is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, Splunk SOAR, Swimlane, Cisco SecureX and D3 Security, whereas SECDO Platform is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR.
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.