We performed a comparison between DFLabs IncMan SOAR and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR 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)."Sentinel's most important feature is the ability to centralize all the logs in one place. There's no need to search multiple systems for information."
"Sentinel has an intuitive, user-friendly way to visualize the data properly. It gives me a solid overview of all the logs. We get a more detailed view that I can't get from the other SIEM tools. It has some IP and URL-specific allow listing"
"I believe one of the main advantages is Microsoft Sentinel's seamless integration with other Microsoft products."
"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."
"Log aggregation and data connectors are the most valuable features."
"We have no complaints about the features or functionality."
"It is easy to implement (turn on) - does need a skilled analyst to develop queries and playbooks."
"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 vendors themselves will actually help with any customizations a client may require"
"For organizations that are stable with their security operations, like those with around 50 members in their security team running full-phased operations 24/7, Cortex is necessary."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR are its overall track record and features that fit our use case."
"Many different playbooks are available and can be customized."
"Cortex XSOAR's most valuable features are the playbooks, custom integration, the machine-learning model, and the layout, classifier, and mapper."
"The product is quite easy to use."
"The pricing is very good."
"The drag-and-drop interface enables analysts with no programming knowledge to create playbooks easily."
"It’s easy to install."
"If their UI was a bit more streamlined and easy to find when I need it, then that would be a great improvement."
"If Azure Sentinel had the ability to ingest Azure services from different tenants into another tenant that was hosting Azure Sentinel, and not lose any metadata, that would be a huge benefit to a lot of companies."
"They only classify alerts into three categories: high, medium, and low. So, from the user's point of view, having another critical category would be awesome."
"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."
"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..."
"Sentinel's reporting is complex and can be more user-friendly."
"If I see an alert and I want to drill down and get more details about the alert, it's not just one click. In other SIEM tools, you just have to click the IP address of the entity and they give you the complete picture. In Sentinel, you have to write queries or use saved queries to get details."
"When it comes to ingesting Azure native log sources, some of the log sources are specific to the subscription, and it is not always very clear."
"The support is not 24/7."
"They should provide integration with machine learning platforms."
"I would like to see Cortex become less dependent on Active Directory and group policies to manage the deployment. Maybe I need to update my understanding of how to deploy it, but that's the way I know how to use it."
"The dashboard performance could be improved."
"I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"XSOAR could have more integration options."
"The solution should be made a bit cheaper."
"There is room for improvement in support. The response time could be faster."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
DFLabs IncMan SOAR is ranked 28th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews. DFLabs IncMan SOAR is rated 0.0, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of DFLabs IncMan SOAR writes "Protects an organization from the threat of a data breach or cyberattack". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". DFLabs IncMan SOAR is most compared with IBM Resilient, whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and IBM Resilient.
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.