We performed a comparison between ArcSight Logger and syslog-ng 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."We check a lot of logs in ArcSight Logger because we're running a massive database platform."
"It's a robust, mature product and you can do some really complex operations and analytics."
"It is one of the best products available in the market."
"In terms of ArcSight Logger's most valuable feature, it is their scalability. ArcSight's real advantage is its scalability because they have two layers, including the logger layer."
"The log digestion features from threat intelligence platforms like Recorded Future or Talos are valuable."
"The solution provides information about the risk factors."
"It provides in-depth information on business activities once we log into the system."
"The technical support team is good...It is a scalable solution."
"Syslog-ng has a separate config file in addition to the core configuration."
"Syslog-ng has built-in features that we can use to create alerts for a SIEM solution. It isn't a true SIEM solution, but it's sufficient for the time being."
"For us, the most valuable feature is the use of compound search for searching logs at a specific time, by a specific user, or specific behavior."
"The ability to extract and store the logs is the most valuable feature of syslog-ng."
"Syslog-ng provides easy access to all my logs. It helps me show managers and other clients precisely where an incident occurred. I also like it because you can integrate syslog-ng with multiple solutions to allow real-time monitoring."
"I would rate the technical support only 5 out of 10. The technical support is not satisfactory."
"You have limited reporting capabilities and I wouldn't choose ArcSight Logger for this purpose."
"The solution must provide readymade connectors for different applications."
"The initial setup was a little bit complex."
"I would like to see better scheduling in the next release of this solution."
"It's not a new product and is a bit complex. So, it requires a person dedicated to working on it and to know about it in and out. It is a huge product, and the search operation is a bit complicated for a new user or someone who has not used it for long. So for that person, it becomes a bit difficult."
"We find that the search and access functionality is quite slow."
"The product's connectors should work better and the user manuals need an update."
"There is always the potential for additional integration and protocol extensions."
"It's hard to find people who know how to use syslog-ng. I often find problems with configurations, and solutions aren't integrated correctly with syslog-ng. For example, there might be data with extra decimals, or the collector agents are incorrectly named. It isn't a problem with the solution; it's a lack of professionals."
"There is room for improvement in terms of observability."
"The filtering has room for improvement."
"Syslog-ng has built-in features that we can use to create alerts for a SIEM solution. It isn't a true SIEM solution, but it's sufficient for the time being."
ArcSight Logger is ranked 29th in Log Management with 30 reviews while syslog-ng is ranked 17th in Log Management with 5 reviews. ArcSight Logger is rated 7.8, while syslog-ng is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of ArcSight Logger writes "A scalable and stable solution that enables users to see all the event logs in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of syslog-ng writes "It's a user-friendly open-source solution that can replace or augment a commercial product in some cases". ArcSight Logger is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Wazuh and Grafana Loki, whereas syslog-ng is most compared with SolarWinds Kiwi Syslog Server, Graylog, Grafana Loki, Logstash and Elastic Security. See our ArcSight Logger vs. syslog-ng 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.
