We performed a comparison between Aruba IntroSpect and Cisco Secure Network Analytics based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I haven't heard of any issues with stability."
"Roaming feature, application control and firewall features."
"The most valuable feature is the end-user monitoring. If there is any abnormal behavior on the machine, the administrator will be alerted."
"This product alleviates the day-to-day headaches for us, in regards to metrics."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its reporting and mitigation capabilities."
"The feature most valuable for us is to gain visibility of what is actually floating through, so we can stop it based on whether it's good or bad traffic."
"Being able to graph and show data to management has improved our organization. We can show the data to the higher-ups. It shows them that it's picking up on these anomalies and doing its job."
"It's easy to set up. The deployment takes one or two days. You need to collect the data from a device and then direct it to the portal."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Secure Network Analytics is the Threat Intelligence integration."
"Provides easily identifiable anomalies that you can't see with signature detections."
"Using the Cognitive Analytics feature, we have complete visibility that we didn’t have before."
"The packet analyzer needs improvement."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard, where you can get the information with a simple click."
"Technical support is a little slow."
"The initial setup is complex, as there is a lot to configure."
"Stealthwatch needs improvement when it comes to speed."
"We had some trouble with the installation as we migrated from our previous solution."
"We are continuing down the road of ACI and ISE with Cisco, so we would like to see the continuation of Stealthwatch integrating into ISE for exchange of information, and also, more into the ACI environment too."
"It's not great as a standalone solution."
"I would like Cisco to make it easier for the administrators to use it."
"There could be better integration on the programming side, which uses Python. StealthWatch could provide a template for Python to manage the switches. For example, it would be nice if StealthWatch bounced a port automatically it detected something anomalous."
"The initial setup was complex."
More Cisco Secure Network Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba IntroSpect is ranked 14th in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) while Cisco Secure Network Analytics is ranked 4th in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 57 reviews. Aruba IntroSpect is rated 8.6, while Cisco Secure Network Analytics is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba IntroSpect writes "A straightforward setup for technical users and an overall good product". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Secure Network Analytics writes "Increased the visibility of what is happening in our network". Aruba IntroSpect is most compared with Arista NDR, LogRhythm UEBA, Darktrace, SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer and Auvik Network Management (ANM), whereas Cisco Secure Network Analytics is most compared with Darktrace, Cisco Secure Cloud Analytics, ThousandEyes, Vectra AI and Arista NDR. See our Aruba IntroSpect vs. Cisco Secure Network Analytics report.
See our list of best Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) vendors.
We monitor all Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) 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.