We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and NetWitness Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, NETSCOUT, Akamai and others in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection."It's very flexible and we can easily deploy it to our network. It's very user-friendly. We can do everything via the web interface and troubleshoot easily from the CLI. It's not complicated."
"In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address."
"The stability is okay and we have not encountered problems with the solution."
"It is fully mitigating the attacks. We've dealt with other ones where we didn't necessarily see that. The detection is very good. It's also very simple to use. Arbor is a single pane of glass, whereas with other solutions you might have a detection pane of glass and then have to go to a separate interface to deal with the mitigation. That single pane of glass makes it much simpler."
"The technical support of Arbor DDoS is good."
"The solution provides good protection against volumetric DDoS attacks."
"The product allows us to check real-time progress, including latency and network activities."
"Valuable features include simple and centralized management of user access and capabilities, as well as Web 2.0 interactive attack alerting, traffic visualization, and mitigation service control."
"It gives the capability for the incident response team to correlate logs to identify any kind of problem like malware and incidents in a general sense, both for logs and packets."
"Their technical support responds quickly and are knowledgable."
"Performance and reporting are very good."
"The most valuable features are the threat prediction and network forensics."
"The most valuable features are the packet inspection and the automated incident response."
"NetWitness can be highly beneficial for incident detection and response."
"Possibility to investigate incidents based on logs and raw packets, such as extracting files sent over the network"
"I can have enterprise security, email security, next generation firewall security log, HIDS and NIDS logs, etc. all on the same dashboard. It makes it easy to pinpoint or correlate our server to this. I can find out if there is lateral movement. This is the biggest advantage of this solution."
"I would also like more visibility into their bad actor feeds, their fingerprint feeds. We try to be good stewards of the internet, so if there are attacks, or bad actors within our networks, if there were an easier way for us to find them, we could stop them from doing their malicious activity, and at the same time save money."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"The regional support here in African could improve, such as marketing and account managers."
"There is always room for improvement for any product or service. If we can bring in more agility when deploying services, that is definitely a scope which we can work towards. Nowadays, everything is being offered as a service model. It is not that we have to deploy the physical hardware, many things move up to the cloud, or even can be delivered in the VNS form in the customer's environment as well. So, in that space, if we can add more features to make it more seamless for customers to use and make it available through some marketplace, not only at the hyperscalers, but also for any on-prem deployment, that definitely would be a big plus."
"Sometimes it blocks legitimate traffic. If a legitimate user is trying to access the server continuously, the product suspects that this is a DoS traffic file. That is a case where it needs to improve. It needs machine-learning."
"The implementation should be made easier."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"The solution needs to enhance its features to compete with other tools."
"The threat detection capability and centralizing and upgrading capability need to be improved. The threat alert capability needs to be improved as well because there is some lag time at present. They need to work on their database search too."
"Health monitoring of the event sources and devices."
"Lots of competing products have vulnerability protection built into their products, and this solution would be improved by including that support."
"It should have a monitoring feature. It would help us analyze the current state of attacks faster from a single platform."
"An area for improvement would be better automation and more inbuilt use cases."
"Nowadays, their support is a little subpar compared to other solutions. I rate RSA support six out of 10."
"There is no support for this product in this country, so problems have to be resolved through global technical teams."
"The documentation is not as structured as I would like, personally, and I think that it can be improved and made much more user-friendly."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while NetWitness Platform is ranked 18th in Log Management with 36 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Imperva DDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Elastic Security.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.