We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR and ServiceNow Security Operations 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."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."
"Previously, it was a little bit difficult to find where an incident came from, including which IP address and which country. So in Sentinel, it's very easy to find where the incident came from since we can easily get the information from the dashboard, after which we take action quickly."
"The log analysis is excellent; it can predict what can or will happen regarding use patterns and vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable features in my experience are the UEBA, LDAP, the threat scheduler, and integration with third-party straight perform like the MISP."
"Microsoft Sentinel comes preloaded with templates for teaching and analytics rules."
"Sentinel's most important feature is the ability to centralize all the logs in one place. There's no need to search multiple systems for information."
"The SOAR playbooks are Sentinel's most valuable feature. It gives you a unified toolset for detecting, investigating, and responding to incidents. That's what clearly differentiates Sentinels from its competitors. It's cloud-native, offering end-to-end coverage with more than 120 connectors. All types of data logs can be poured into the system so analysis can happen. That end-to-end visibility gives it the advantage."
"The main benefit is the ease of integration."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Its agility and scalability are valuable."
"Palo Alto is easy to use."
"It’s easy to install."
"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."
"The strengths of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR stem from the fact that it provides functionalities related to patching and URL blocking...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution is available over the cloud and is easy to manage."
"The solution is stable."
"What I found most valuable in ServiceNow Security Operations is that it's very useful for any incoming vulnerability. For example, if my team finds any vulnerability on servers such as the CA and CMDB integrated with ServiceNow Security Operations, my team can make some changes. My team can map the vulnerabilities found on the CA server, make the changes required, and resolve the vulnerabilities before the system is attacked. You can avoid vulnerability attacks through ServiceNow Security Operations, so this is the best feature of the solution. ServiceNow Security Operations is beneficial mainly for vulnerability response and engagement purposes."
"Reduces time to closure and closure metrics for vulnerabilities."
"Integration to other security tools allows for a consolidated view of all vulnerabilities, incidents, etc. for all sorts of leverage in a single platform to assess governance risk and compliance as well as an enhanced, enriched intelligence."
"The ease of use is great."
"The most valuable aspect of working with ServiceNow is its meaningful and feature-rich product."
"The "follow" feature is really good. If the user is not responding, there's an option to "follow". Just click on the button, and it will automatically trigger an email to the end user."
"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."
"If Sentinel had a graphical user interface, it would be easier to use. I would also like it to be more customizable."
"If their UI was a bit more streamlined and easy to find when I need it, then that would be a great improvement."
"While I appreciate the UI itself and the vast amount of information available on the platform, I'm finding the overall user experience to be frustrating due to frequent disconnections and the requirement to repeatedly re-authenticate."
"Sentinel should be improved with more connectors. At the moment, it only covers a few vendors. If I remember correctly, only 100 products are supported natively in Sentinel, although you can connect them with syslog. But Microsoft should increase the number of native connectors to get logs into Sentinel."
"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."
"Documentation is the main thing that could be improved. In terms of product usage, the documentation is pretty good, but I'd like a lot more documentation on Kusto Query Language."
"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."
"For building automation, there is not a lot of good documentation. The documentation is there, but it is not very good from my perspective. There should be an improvement in this area. I don't see issues with anything else. In terms of new features, I have heard that other products have EBA functionality. It would be good if this functionality could be added."
"The dashboard could be better."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing model."
"The tool’s multi-tenancy feature must be improved."
"They should provide integration with machine learning platforms."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the look, feel, and management of the cloud console. Additionally, the user could be more easily integrated."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the Panorama feature. We had to turn it off because it was not working properly."
"The price of the solution could be improved."
"In future releases, I would like to add a follow-up and reminder feature. For the tickets in our queue, we could set reminders. This would help us prioritize older tickets before moving on to new ones."
"It doesn't interact with things very well."
"An area for improvement I observed in ServiceNow Security Operations is the need to maintain correct CMDB data because if you're unable to do this, you can't perfectly maintain the vulnerability data. CMDB data in ServiceNow Security Operations needs to be accurate. As I've been working on ServiceNow Security Operations for only seven months, I still need more time to try all its modules before I can give recommendations regarding additional features I'd like to see in the solution."
"There is room for improvement in terms of developer support and documentation."
"Process framework and best practices for ease of integration between IT and security teams via incident, problem, and change."
"They should stick to the roadmap and continue to build plugins and integrations with other third parties, enhance the UI, and enhance the reporting. It's all good. They should just continue enhancing the releases."
"The solution needs to make customization easier. You cannot do much customization immediately. It requires an extensive workload. If the customization process was user-friendly, it would be much better."
"The initial setup is difficult."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
More ServiceNow Security Operations Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 40 reviews while ServiceNow Security Operations is ranked 8th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 14 reviews. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4, while ServiceNow Security Operations 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 ServiceNow Security Operations writes "Mature with nice UI and customizable workflows". Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and Tines, whereas ServiceNow Security Operations is most compared with Splunk SOAR, IBM Resilient, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP). See our Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR vs. ServiceNow Security Operations 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.