We performed a comparison between ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) and DNIF HYPERCLOUD based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."What is most useful, is that it has a good connection to the Microsoft ecosystem, and I think that's the key part."
"It is able to connect to an ever-growing number of platforms and systems within the Microsoft ecosystem, such as Azure Active Directory and Microsoft 365 or Office 365, as well as to external services and systems that can be brought in and managed. We can manage on-premises infrastructure. We can manage not just the things that are running in Azure in the public cloud, but through Azure Arc and the hybrid capabilities, we can monitor on-premises servers and endpoints. We can monitor VMware infrastructure, for instance, running as part of a hybrid environment."
"The most valuable feature is the UEBA. It's very easy for a security operations analyst. It has a one-touch analysis where you can search for a particular entity, and you can get a complete overview of that entity or user."
"It has a lot of great features."
"The most valuable feature is the onboarding of the workloads. You can see all that has been onboarded in your account on the dashboards."
"Sentinel also enables you to ingest data from your entire ecosystem and not just from the Microsoft ecosystem. It can receive data from third-party vendors' products such firewalls, network devices, and antivirus solutions. It's not only a Microsoft solution, it's for everything."
"The dashboard that allows me to view all the incidents is the most valuable feature."
"Microsoft Sentinel enables you to ingest data from the entire ecosystem and that connection of data helps you to monitor critical resources and to know what's happening in the environment."
"ESM has valuable features for event prediction and security analysis."
"I would rate the ease of use for new users an eight out of ten, with ten being easy to use. It is a good tool."
"The webpage algorithm is the most valuable feature because it was the fastest feature for searching the logs, events, and correlation."
"The tool is good for correlation and aggregation. We use it as a collection platform."
"We use ArcSight ESM for log analysis and security alerts. It warns us of threats and then helps us conduct a forensic investigation of a cyber attack or internal incident after it happens."
"It is a robust product and has multiple valuable features."
"The real-time analysis adds value."
"Usability is the most valuable feature. The accessibility is quite good."
"The User Behavior Analytics is a built-in threat-hunting feature. It detects and reports on any kind of malware or ransomware that enters the network."
"I like the MITRE table, a feature I saw for the first time in the same solution. There was one MITRE tactic table, which can be used to identify threats if you have all kinds of rules enabled or if you have rules for all the tactics in the MITRE table. There are 14 tables in MITRE, and those 14 tables consist of multiple columns, tactics, and techniques. It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table. On that basis, you can create new rules and identify existing ones. At any point, if an alert is triggered, it will try to match it to any of those MITRE tactics. I liked that creating a workbook on MITRE business was straightforward. I also like that you can search using SQL or DQL."
"The response time on queries is super-fast."
"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."
"The solution is quite stable and offers good performance. It also works on a virtual machine. We haven't found any issues with it so far. It's been reliable."
"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."
"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."
"Has a great search capability."
"They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us."
"We do have in-built or out-of-the-box metrics that are shown on the dashboard, but it doesn't give the kind of metrics that we need from our environment whereby we need to check the meantime to detect and meantime to resolve an incident. I have to do it manually. I have to pull all the logs or all the alerts that are fed into Sentinel over a certain period. We do this on a monthly basis, so I go into Microsoft Sentinel and pull all the alerts or incidents we closed over a period of thirty days."
"We are invoiced according to the amount of data generated within each log."
"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."
"Multi-tenancy, in my opinion, needs to be improved. I believe it can do better as a managed service provider."
"One key area that can be improved is by building a strong integration with our XDR platform."
"Only one thing is missing: NDR is not available out-of-the-box. The competitive cloud-native SIEM providers have the NDR component. Currently, Sentinel needs NDR to be powered from either Corelight or some other NDR provider."
"There is room for improvement in entity behavior and the integration site."
"HPE ArcSight has a quite steep learning curve."
"The security area has room for improvement."
"The stability isn't quite perfect. We occasionally run into problems."
"In certain cases, this product does have false positives, which the company should work on."
"ArcSight ESM is lacking cloud scalable technology."
"I would like for them to integrate mobile devices. Integration or any kind of functionality which will act as a substitute for IBM so that we can really track our mobile devices as well as look at SIEM."
"When we need to consume old events, we have to wait for a long time. ArcSight should improve the database capability to reply to queries faster. It would also be interesting if they implemented network visibility. For example, they could add a feature like NetWitness with a model just for looking through the packets."
"They also could improve the product by integrating user and identity behavior analytics."
"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops... If this solution had a smart connector to these logs- Windows, Linux, or any other logs - without affecting the performance of the connector, that would be wonderful."
"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."
"The EBA could be improved."
"I think DNIF HYPERCLOUD can implement the ability to export more than 100,000. At the moment, we can't go beyond that. So many times, if you're checking for the firewall logs and working on something related to authentication or network-related traffic, while that log count is low, the account goes beyond that. You can't restrict the logs or the amount of data you can export. It's very important for my situation. It would be better if they could increase the capacity of exports. Although there are many more types of searching in DNIF HYPERCLOUD, people still struggle to query out what they want because not everyone is good at SQL or DQL. The easiest way to query out in DNIF is using the GUI-based interface. But in the GUI interface, you can use operator calls. It gets tricky when you want to search for a specific type of event. You don't know where it will be passed and whether it will be consistent. In the initial phase, it's tough for us to use DNIF. You cannot pass every event in a stable DNIF. When we used that particular tool, we used to get those logs, but sometimes many things are not getting passed. So, we used to export the sheet or export the data into Excel and weigh the required details. In the next release, I would like them to improve the export of the columns and make the application more user-friendly. I would also like a threat-hunting feature in the next release."
"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."
"The vendor is fairly new and it's not as big as some of the international competitors. It's not a mature product. If you ask them to move data, it might take a lot of time."
"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."
More ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is ranked 12th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 93 reviews while DNIF HYPERCLOUD is ranked 22nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 7 reviews. ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is rated 7.8, while DNIF HYPERCLOUD is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) writes "Allows for monitoring logs according to industry standards within ESM but has a total capacity capped at 12 TB, limiting real-time data retention periods". On the other hand, the top reviewer of DNIF HYPERCLOUD writes "Development from open sources is very valuable but a huge infrastructure is required". ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, ArcSight Intelligence, Trellix ESM, IBM Security QRadar and LogRhythm SIEM, whereas DNIF HYPERCLOUD is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security and Wazuh. See our ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) vs. DNIF HYPERCLOUD report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.