We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and Rapid7 InsightConnect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The Identity Behavior tab furnishes us with the entire history linked to each IP or domain that has either accessed or attempted to access our system."
"The connectivity and analytics are great."
"In Azure Sentinel, we have found, they do have a store in their capability. AI and intelligence features. We found that to be very helpful for us because some other things we do need to integrate again or find another vendor for the store"
"The AI capability is one of the main features of the solution because I believe that in the market, there are few solutions that are providing security solutions based on AI and machine learning."
"I believe one of the main advantages is Microsoft Sentinel's seamless integration with other Microsoft products."
"I like the unified security console. You can close incidents using Sentinel in all other Microsoft Security portals, when it comes to incident response."
"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."
"The dashboard that allows me to view all the incidents is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to configure."
"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."
"The solution is easy to deploy."
"The repository of playbooks and the integration between Palo Alto and IBM QRadar are some useful features"
"The most valuable features are simplicity and ease of integration."
"The most valuable features are the orchestration because of the way in which it coordinates the loss from all the devices and it provides us with a high-level overview of the critical log information."
"It’s easy to install."
"The tool is stable. The initial setup is straightforward. The product is user-friendly."
"Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise."
"They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft."
"Sentinel still has some anomalies. For example, sometimes when we write a query for log analysis with KQL, it doesn't give us the data in a proper way... Also, the fields or columns could be improved. Sometimes, it is not giving the desired results and there is a blank field."
"They should integrate it with many other software-as-a-service providers and make connectors available so that you don't have to do any sort of log normalization."
"Its implementation could be simpler. It is not really simple or straightforward. It is in the middle. Sometimes, connectors are a little bit complex."
"I would like to see more AI used in processes."
"I can't think of anything other than just getting the name out there. I think a lot of customers don't fully understand the full capabilities of Azure Sentinel yet. It is kind of like when they're first starting to use Azure, it might not be something they first think about. So, they should just kind of get to the point where it is more widely used."
"The performance could be improved. If I create 15 to 20 lines for a single-use case in KQL, sometimes it takes more time to execute. If I create use cases within a certain timeline, the result will show in .01 seconds. A complex query takes more time to get results."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR lacks to offer SIEM functionalities currently."
"Palo Alto needs to develop more AI-centric products."
"When Palo Alto bought the solution, the pricing increased by 1.5 times. There's been a 50% increase, which is a lot."
"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."
"The solution’s price and technical support could be improved."
"The solution requires DV but does not support open-source DV elastic searches."
"The solution's correlation rules and playbooks should be improved."
"The technical support should be improved."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews while Rapid7 InsightConnect is ranked 22nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 2 reviews. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4, while Rapid7 InsightConnect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rapid7 InsightConnect writes "Excellent security orchestration and automation AI features". Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and IBM Resilient, whereas Rapid7 InsightConnect is most compared with ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), CrowdStrike Falcon and Splunk SOAR. See our Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs. Rapid7 InsightConnect report.
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.