Most Helpful Review
Researched Cisco Stealthwatch but chose Vectra AI: Reduces the times between an alert and a ticket coming up
Researched Cisco Stealthwatch but chose McAfee Network Security Platform: The IPS has proven that it can find events and items, which previously went under the radar
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Stealthwatch vs. McAfee Network Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
407,538 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
The solution's ability to reduce alerts, by rolling up numerous alerts to create a single incident or campaign, helps in that it collapses all the events to a particular host, or a particular detection to a set of hosts. So it doesn't generate too many alerts. By and large, whatever alerts it generates are actionable, and actionable within the day.
One of the most valuable features of the platform is its ability to provide you with aggregated risk scores based on impact and certainty of threats being detected. This is both applied to individual and host detections. This is important because it enables us to use this platform to prioritize the most likely imminent threats. So, it reduces alert fatigue follow ups for security operation center analysts. It also provides us with an ability to prioritize limited resources.
It is doing some artificial intelligence. If it sees a server doing a lot of things, then it will assume that is normal. So, it is looking for anomalous behavior, things that are out of context which helps us reduce time. Therefore, we don't have to look in all the logs. We just wait for Vectra to say, "This one is behaving strange," then we can investigate that part.
One of the key advantages for us is we define a 24/7 service around it. We use far more of Vectra alerts than we do with our SIEM product because we understand that when we get an alert from Vectra we actually need to do something about it.
The most valuable feature is anomaly detection, where it finds things that are not allowed internally.
Most of the engineers I've worked with have been really good. Very knowledgeable and easy to work with.
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 a dependable product that is able to pinpoint where we have vulnerabilities if they occur.
Using the Cognitive Analytics feature, we have complete visibility that we didn’t have before.
The most valuable feature about this solution is that it gives me insight of my network.
It has improved our internal knowledge of what's going on with the network, and that's helpful.
The most valuable features of this solution are the logging, keeping threats under control, and keeping our data and environment secure.
The feature I found most valuable is the network threat analyzer in the security platform. It also integrates with GTI, or Global Threat Intelligence. Otherwise, I just use the basic features.
The most valuable features are the customization of the signature and the unlimited amount of signatures in IPS.
The ability to centrally manage all the IPS sensors, track the different security events generated by it, and customize the different policies, depending on their location.
One thing which I have found where there could be improvement is with regard to the architecture, a little bit: how the brains and sensors function. It needs more flexibility with regard to the brain. If there were some flexibility in that regard, that would be helpful, because changing the mode of the brain is complex. In some cases, the change is permanent. You cannot revert it.
You are always limited with visibility on the host due to the fact that it is a network based tool. It gives you visibility on certain elements of the attack path, but it doesn't necessarily give you visibility on everything. Specifically, the initial intrusion side of things that doesn't necessarily see the initial compromise. It doesn't see stuff that goes on the host, such as where scripts are run. Even though you are seeing traffic, it doesn't necessarily see the malicious payload. Therefore, it's very difficult for it to identify these type of host-driven complex attacks.
We would like to see more information with the syslogs. The syslogs that they send to our SIEM are a bit short compared to what you can see. It would be helpful if they send us more data that we can incorporate into our SIEM, then can correlate with other events.
The solution has not reduced the security analyst workload in our organization because we still need to SIEM. Unfortunately, while Vectra, for us, is a brilliant tool for network investigations, giving wonderful visibility, it doesn't go the whole way to replace our SIEM that is needed for compliance. So, I still have the same amount of alerting and logging that I did before. It gives us more defined ability to see incidents, but it doesn't give us enough information to satisfy a PCI or 27001 audit.
The usability of this solution needs to be improved.
We've run into some issues with the configuration.
They should include Citrix VDIs in the next release.
The GUI could use some improvement. Being able to find features more easily would be a great improvement if it was simplified.
The initial setup is complex, as there is a lot to configure.
It hasn't really improved our direct detection rate but it has definitely reduced our incident response time as we wouldn't have been able to detect threats or immediate risks without this solution.
I would like to see more and cleaner reporting. For example, if I pull up Steven and I want to look and maybe compare him to what you've done in the past week, and compare that to the past six months, the point would be to see what the difference in activity looks like over this time. I don't see that capability in reporting to date. You see that trend but you don't really see a straightforward comparison. That right there is key to what we want to see about the normal activity.
It is time-consuming to set it up and understand how the tool works.
Integration with Global Thereat Intelligence could be better. Also, I think management solutions are end of life now at McAfee. Network threat analyzer may be used for endpoint quarantines. Integration between these sides, as well as endpoint APO, will help you quarantine the risky endpoints.
The solution needs to improve the graphical interface. And they had a limitation in some of the sensor modems as well.
The Network Security Managers could be more stable, agile, and work faster. When it comes to instability, there is room for improvement.
Pricing and Cost Advice
We have a desire to increase our use. However, it all comes down to budget. It's a very expensive tool that is very difficult to prove business support for. We would like to have two separate networks. We have our corporate network and PCI network, which is segregated due to payment processing. We don't have it for deployed in the PCI network. It would be good to have it fully deployed there to provide us with additional monitoring and control, but the cost associated with their licensing model makes it prohibitively expensive to deploy.
At the time of purchase, we found the pricing acceptable. We had an urgency to get something in place because we had a minor breach that occurred at the tail end of 2016 to the beginning of 2017. This indicated we had a lack of ability to detect things on the network. Hence, why we moved quickly to get into the tool in place. We found things like Bitcoin mining and botnets which we closed quickly. In that regard, it was worth the money.
The license is based on the concurrent IP addresses that it's investigating. We are around $300,000 a year for three years. We have 9,800 to 10,000 IP addresses.
There are additional features that can be purchased in addition to the standard licensing fee, such as Cognito Recall and Stream.
We are running at about 90,000 pounds per year. The solution is a licensed cost. The hardware that they gave us was pretty much next to nothing. It is the license that we're paying for.
Our fees are approximately $3,000 USD.
Licensing is on a yearly basis.
We pay for support costs on a yearly basis.
On a yearly basis, licensing is somewhere around $30,000.
The yearly licensing cost is about $50,000.
The pricing for this solution is good.
The licensing costs are outrageous.
Information Not Available
Compared 39% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 5% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Also Known As
|Vectra Networks||Cisco Stealthwatch Enterprise, Lancope StealthWatch|
Vectra® is the leader in network detection and response – from cloud and data center workloads to user and IoT devices. Its Cognito® platform accelerates threat detection and investigation using artificial intelligence to collect, store and enrich network metadata with the right context to detect, hunt and investigate known and unknown threats in real time. Vectra offers three applications on the Cognito platform to address high-priority use cases. Cognito Stream™ sends security-enriched metadata to data lakes and SIEMs. Cognito Recall™ is a cloud-based application to store and investigate threats in enriched metadata. And Cognito Detect™ uses AI to reveal and prioritize hidden and unknown attackers at speed.
Cisco Stealthwatch uses NetFlow to provide visibility across the network, data center, branch offices, and cloud. Its advanced security analytics uncover stealthy attacks on the extended network. Stealthwatch helps you use your existing network as a security sensor and enforcer to dramatically improve your threat defense.
McAfee Network Security Platform is a uniquely intelligent security solution that discovers and blocks sophisticated threats in the network. Using advanced detection and emulation techniques, it moves beyond mere pattern matching to defend against stealthy attacks with a high degree of accuracy. This next-generation hardware platform scales to speeds of more than 40 Gbps with a single device to meet the needs of demanding networks. Our Unified Defense Architecture approach to security management streamlines security operations by combining real-time McAfee Global Threat Intelligence feeds with rich contextual data about users, devices, and applications for fast, accurate response to network-borne attacks.
Learn more about Vectra AI
Learn more about Cisco Stealthwatch
Learn more about McAfee Network Security Platform
|Tribune Media Group, Barry University, Aruba Networks, Good Technology, Riverbed, Santa Clara University, Securities Exchange, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association||Edge Web Hosting, Telenor Norway, Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana, Webster Financial Corporation, Westinghouse Electric, VMware, TIAA-CREF||Desjardins Group, HollyFrontier, Nubia, Agbar, WNS Global Services, INAIL, Universidad de Las Américas Puebla (UDLAP), Cook County, China Pacific Insurance, Bank Central Asia, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, City of Chicago, Macquarie Telecom, Sutherland Global Services, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, United Automotive Electronic Systems|
Comms Service Provider24%
Software R&D Company22%
Financial Services Firm16%
Comms Service Provider27%
Software R&D Company19%
No Data Available