We performed a comparison between IBM Security QRadar and Trellix ESM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Sentinel improved how we investigate incidents. We can create watchlists and update them to align with the latest threat intelligence. The information Microsoft provides enables us to understand thoroughly and improve as we go along. It allows us to provide monthly reports to our clients on their security posture."
"The most valuable features in my experience are the UEBA, LDAP, the threat scheduler, and integration with third-party straight perform like the MISP."
"Previously, it was a little bit difficult to find where an incident came from, including which IP address and which country. So in Sentinel, it's very easy to find where the incident came from since we can easily get the information from the dashboard, after which we take action quickly."
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"There are a lot of things you can explore as a user. You can even go and actively hunt for threats. You can go on the offensive rather than on the defensive."
"The most valuable features are its threat handling and detection. It's a powerful tool because it's based on machine learning and on the behavior of malware."
"Sentinel is a Microsoft product, so they provide very robust use cases and analytic groups, which are very beneficial for the security team. I also like the ability to integrate data sources into the software for on-premise and cloud-based solutions."
"There are some very powerful features to Sentinel, such as the integration of various connectors. We have a lot of departments that use both IaaS and SaaS services, including M365 as well as Azure services. The ability to leverage connectors into these environments allows for large-scale data injection."
"IBM Security QRadar has significantly improved our incident response procedures."
"One of the most valuable features is its ability to integrate with other solutions. IBM has a lot of solutions and we have managed to make it work with IBM BigFix and MaaS360, and even Microsoft."
"We have the abilities to monitor each instance which originates on the process along with the performance of each department."
"The solution is easy to use, manage, and review all incidents."
"Overall a great solution."
"We can easily monitor many things using this tool."
"It is incredibly easy to deploy. All the appliances are flexible in the roles that they serve and are all managed the in the same way."
"It is very stable. We have not faced interruptions in the past four and a half years."
"It is a good central viewpoint for issues. These can then be investigated in more detail on the subnet server(s)/endpoints."
"I rate the tool's deployment an eight out of ten. The deployment is completed in two days."
"The support I have received from the vendor has been great."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to correlate different events from different platforms that we feed into it."
"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."
"It can be easily deployed with the other solutions."
"It has good technical support, which is available around the clock. You can call up anytime and get whatever you want. My queues are resolved."
"It is user-friendly. The notification part of McAfee ESM is very easy."
"If we want to use more features, we have to pay more. There are multiple solutions on the cloud itself, but the pricing model package isn't consistent, which is confusing to clients."
"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."
"At the network level, there is a limitation in integrating some of the switches or routers with Microsoft Sentinel. Currently, SPAN traffic monitoring is not available in Microsoft Sentinel. I have heard that it is available in Defender for Identity, which is a different product. It would be good if LAN traffic monitoring or SPAN traffic monitoring is available in Microsoft Sentinel. It would add a lot of value. It is available in some of the competitor products in the market."
"We'd like also a better ticketing system, which is older."
"We're satisfied with the comprehensiveness of the security protection. That said, we do have issues sometimes where there have been global outages and we need to raise a ticket with Microsoft."
"One key area that can be improved is by building a strong integration with our XDR platform."
"Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise."
"The only thing is sometimes you can have a false positive."
"The dashboards are all legacy and old."
"QRadar's performance has room for improvement because it cannot handle the volume. I need massive amounts of logs from various devices in our existing network architecture. IBM needs to improve QRadar's capacity to handle more logs."
"The modularity could be improved."
"There should be easier and wider integration opportunities. There should be more opportunities for integration with CTI info sharing areas. On platforms where you exchange CTI, there should be more visibility connected to what we share, what we can reach, or what options are connected to CTI info sharing. This is one area where they could add value because we cannot integrate it easily with QRadar. If a client has a legacy or already existing solutions for CTI, we cannot ask them to forget it because we cannot guarantee that QRadar is able to deliver everything connected to this area."
"The user interface is a bit clunky, a bit hard to find what you need."
"Maybe there should be more custom rules in the exchange. Basically, we are using a lot of threat rules, so maybe they'll develop something like that."
"I would like to see some artificial intelligence and alternative solutions."
"They should provide more manual examples online so that I can learn it myself."
"Tech support is required each time there is a system update of the solution."
"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."
"McAfee is no more providing security updates on this product, and the enhancements to this product seem to have stopped. Moreover, we don't get proper support, and we struggle to get its support. It would be good if they can add some AI engine and out of the box use cases because it is currently limited to the same scenario and the same setup. I have done a POC for Securonix, LogRhythm. These products are much more ahead as compared to McAfee ESM. They have included multiple modules in the same solution. Correlation is very easy. If McAfee ESM can improve, especially in such implementations, then I believe it would be much better."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"There should be support for multitenancy in the product."
"It seems McAfee does test its product before releasing. When we - not only us, other companies also - deploy McAfee, we face multiple issues from the customer side, after which, McAfee reacts and fixes the bugs."
"I would like to see fingerprint recognition included in the next release of this solution."
"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."
IBM Security QRadar is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 198 reviews while Trellix ESM is ranked 19th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 34 reviews. IBM Security QRadar is rated 8.0, while Trellix ESM is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Security QRadar writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix ESM writes "Provides visibility of all the traffic within the company infrastructure". IBM Security QRadar is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Wazuh, LogRhythm SIEM, Elastic Security and Sentinel, whereas Trellix ESM is most compared with ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), LogRhythm SIEM, Splunk Enterprise Security, Trellix Helix and Cybereason Endpoint Detection & Response. See our IBM Security QRadar vs. Trellix ESM report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
i have implemented the IBM QRadar, its the simplest to install and configure.
install, add log sources,create use cases as per your needs and QRadar will log all the events and network activity.
you can then perform forensics as well as vulnerability scans.
The basic things like adding log sources is hopefully not a problem but i think to get most value from the SIEM is to make a list of use cases tweaked to your organisation and log sources to find the problems/incidents your C-level can understand. Then you will keep on getting the fundings you need to get the issues you think is necessary to make the SIEM a valuable tool.
I've implemented AccelOps SIEM which also does Server/Network Performance and Availability monitoring. Most of the work involved was with configuration of SNMPv2/v3 or WMI on endpoint devices if the SIEM is not agent-based. Also, a lot of configuration with fine tuning the rules/reports specific to your organization as mentioned. Basic Linux knowledge is also recommended for AccelOps. I would also recommend purchasing Proessional Services hours for implementation guidance and proper training of IT staff and end-users (if applicable) that will be accessing/using the SIEM.
Hello. If you need any assistance through sizing and deployment of IBM QRadar, you should contact a local sales partner in your area. A partner should be able to size your specific needs, no matter little or big they are.
is it the same now for Alienvault? What level of Linux knowledge is needed?
I have implemented McAfee Nitro and IMB Qradar, where the later was the easiest to implement. Majority of the work is fine tuning and creating rules that are specific for your organization. All vendors will tell you about builtin intelligence that offer nothing in the read world
We implemented the Alienvault USM product and one of the largest considerations to make is the Linux knowledge required to implement, configure and manage the solution. Depending on the current in-house skill set and architecture this may or may not present as a consideration.