We performed a comparison between Elastic Security and Nagios Log Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is scalable."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the speed, as it responds in a very short time."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the prevention methods and the incident alerts."
"The scalability is good. It can be scaled easily in the production environment."
"Elastic Security is very easy to adapt."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to collect authentication information from service providers."
"It is an extremely stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The product is scalable."
"It provides an easy way to identify errors and spot issues, making troubleshooting more efficient."
"A great feature of the solution involves its internal portal."
"The initial setup of Nagios Log Server was easy and straightforward."
"One of the most valuable features is the dashboard because the UI was effective and easy to use. The alert systems are good as well. We had no failovers and had high availability. We can search the queries fast as well in Nagios Log Server."
"With Elastic Security, the challenge arises from the fact that there is a learning curve in relation to queries and understanding the query language provided to extract usable data."
"They don't provide user authentication and authorisation features (Shield) as a part of their open-source version."
"The interface could be more user friendly because it is sometimes hard to deal with."
"We're using the open-source edition, for now, I think maybe they can allow their OLED plugin to be open source, as at the moment it is commercialised."
"The solution does not have a UI and this is one of the reasons we are looking for another solution."
"We are paying dearly for the guy who is working on the ELK Stack. That knowledge is quite rare and hard to come by. For difficulty and availability of resources, I would rate it a five out of 10."
"Technical support could respond faster."
"Elastic Security could improve the documentation. It would help if they were more simple and clean."
"The customization and dashboards have shortcomings and need to be improved to make the tool look more presentable."
"It would be beneficial for Nagios to incorporate a tool that goes beyond log management and includes features to monitor overall system health and assess the effectiveness of antivirus solutions."
"The configurations during initial setup could be improved. If they could be agentless, as in the case of the Ansible product, it would be better. I would like to be able to analyze the network bandwidth."
"The support could be better."
"As we are talking about a product which is open to the public, the pricing makes it challenging for us to profit off of its marketing."
Elastic Security is ranked 5th in Log Management with 59 reviews while Nagios Log Server is ranked 38th in Log Management with 5 reviews. Elastic Security is rated 7.6, while Nagios Log Server is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "A stable and scalable tool that provides visibility along with the consolidation of logs to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios Log Server writes "A scalable and affordable tool for monitoring data centers ". Elastic Security is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, IBM Security QRadar and Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, whereas Nagios Log Server is most compared with Wazuh, Graylog, LogRhythm SIEM, syslog-ng and IBM Security QRadar. See our Elastic Security vs. Nagios Log Server report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.