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.
"Log aggregation and data connectors are the most valuable features."
"Sentinel is a Microsoft product, so they provide very robust use cases and analytic groups, which are very beneficial for the security team. I also like the ability to integrate data sources into the software for on-premise and cloud-based solutions."
"The most valuable features in my experience are the UEBA, LDAP, the threat scheduler, and integration with third-party straight perform like the MISP."
"Sentinel uses Azure Logic Apps for automation, which is really powerful. This allows us to easily automate responses to incidents."
"The analytic rule is the most valuable feature."
"The analytics has a lot of advantages because there are 300 default use cases for rules and we can modify them per our environment. We can create other rules as well. Analytics is a useful feature."
"Microsoft Sentinel comes preloaded with templates for teaching and analytics rules."
"We didn't have anything similar. So, it really provides value from the incidents and automation point of view. The overview of the security fabric is most valuable."
"It has absolutely improved the efficiency of our security team. We use it internally as well. It is such a powerful tool that our internal security team became a customer of our ArcSight managed service."
"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."
"We do consulting and I get feedback from our clients that the product really helped them with compliance, especially with GDPR."
"The most useful features are directories, price, and live reporting."
"Once the rules are defined, it is capable of detecting minute changes in the systems, which are effectively based on the entries in the log."
"The stability of ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager is good."
"I value the event correlation of this product."
"The solution offers very good monitoring."
"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."
"The response time on queries is super-fast."
"Has a great search capability."
"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."
"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."
"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."
"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."
"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 only thing is sometimes you can have a false positive."
"Currently, the watchlist feature is being utilized, and although there have been improvements, it is still not fully optimized."
"Sentinel provides decent visibility, but it's sometimes a little cumbersome to get to the information I want because there is so much information. I would also like to see more seamless integration between Sentinel and third-party security products."
"Sentinel could improve its ticketing and management. A few customers I have worked with liked to take the data created in Sentinel. You can make some basic efforts around that, but the customers wanted to push it to a third-party system so they could set up a proper ticketing management system, like ServiceNow, Jira, etc."
"Sentinel can be used in two ways. With other tools like QRadar, I don't need to run queries. Using Sentinel requires users to learn KQL to run technical queries and check things. If they don't know KQL, they can't fully utilize the solution."
"The AI capabilities must be improved."
"The solution should allow for a streamlined CI/CD procedure."
"At the network level, there is a limitation in integrating some of the switches or routers with Microsoft Sentinel. Currently, SPAN traffic monitoring is not available in Microsoft Sentinel. I have heard that it is available in Defender for Identity, which is a different product. It would be good if LAN traffic monitoring or SPAN traffic monitoring is available in Microsoft Sentinel. It would add a lot of value. It is available in some of the competitor products in the market."
"The initial setup could be more straightforward."
"The dashboard looks a bit cumbersome."
"The centralized dashboard for the hybrid cloud environment needs to be more focused. It needs to be redefined because it's missing most of the information. It should be a little bit easy to use. Currently, integration with various applications and connectors is not that easy. Deployment is easy, but integration is not that easy. ArcSight also has a very high bandwidth consumption to pull the local servers. It should have some kind of better process or ability to transfer files from on-premises to the cloud, from the cloud to on-premises, and from a cloud to another cloud."
"When I asked our networking juniors for a comparison between LogRhythm and ArcSight, they said that both platforms are almost the same. It is just that LogRhythm is more modern with a digital platform, which probably gives it some advantage over ArcSight. ArcSight is a very old and mature product that is running on an old platform. It is an old legacy platform. In terms of new features, it just requires platform upgrades so that it becomes lighter and easily adaptable, specifically in the cloud. It would be a good thing if they can also make reporting easier."
"The API integration could be better, and I'd like to see more machine-learning capabilities in the future."
"ArcSight ESM is lacking cloud scalable technology."
"Customer service and support is our biggest challenge."
"The stability isn't quite perfect. We occasionally run into problems."
"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."
"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."
"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 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."
"The EBA could be improved."
"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."
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.
