Art FaccioDirector Cyber Threat Intelligence at IGT
Anonymous UserSVP Insider Threat at a financial services firm
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."
"Even if it's a relatively technical tool or platform, it's very intuitive and graphical. It's very appealing in terms of the user interface. The UI has a graphically interface with the raw data in a table. The table can be as big as you want it, depending on your use case. You can easily get a report combining your data, along with calculations and graphical dashboards. You don't need a lot of training, because the UI is relatively very intuitive."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean."
"One of the biggest features of the UI is that you see the actual code of what you're doing in the graphical user interface, in a little window on the side. Whatever you're doing, you see the code, what's happening. And you can really quickly switch between using the GUI and using the code. That's really useful."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"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."
"What I like most is that the threat models and risk scoring are very accurate and very helpful to the analysts on my team. They help highlight the most important things for them to look at."
"The second feature is that within the SNYPR product there is a functionality called Spotter. We use that for link analysis diagrams and to run the stats command. That's extremely useful because it replaces a tedious, manual process we used to use, using Microsoft Excel and a couple of other methods, to bring data together."
"The customizability of the tool is valuable. We are able to customize the use cases and create them easily without a large amount of Securonix assistance. It's very flexible. We do not have to rely on Professional Services to modify or create a new use case."
"The feature that is most valuable is the fact that it's an open platform, so it allows us to modify policies and tune policies as needed. There's also a feature called Data Insights which allows us to create different dashboards on specific things of interest for us."
"The machine-learning algorithms are the most valuable feature because they're able to identify the 'needle in the haystack.'"
"When we were looking for products for our security monitoring needs, our biggest requirement was that we wanted something based on machine-learning and analytics. If you go with rules, it can raise a lot of noise. Securonix, with its UEBA capability, had the best analytics use-cases."
"One of the most valuable features it has is the thread chaining. One of the common issues that we always had was the number of anomalies that we used to get and the number of alerts that we used to get. But with this approach of thread chaining, we've found the false-positive rate has decreased very significantly. That was something that we never could have achieved before."
"The most valuable feature is being able to look at users' behavioral profiles to see what they typically access. One of the key events that we monitor is people's downloading of objects... It's very easy to see people's patterns, what they typically do."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to parse different log types. The breadth of overall log parsers that exists right now is an area that they could improve. Natively, there's more that could be done by Devo then what it can and can't understand from a parsing perspective."
"Devo has a lot of cloud connectors, but they need to do a little bit of work there. They've got good integrations with the public cloud, but there are a lot of cloud SaaS systems that they still need to work with on integrations, such as Salesforce and other SaaS providers where we need to get access logs."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"Technical support could be better."
"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."
"A helpful feature would be an event export. A way to create more substantial summary reports would be nice."
"Other than issues with the training, there have been issues with the encryption. There have also been issues with some of the reporting, minor glitches that they have fixed as they've gone along."
"Securonix implements risk scores based on different policies that are triggered. We've seen some challenges with the risk scores and how they trigger. These are things that Securonix has recognized and they've been working with us to help improve things."
"There is room for improvement in the product's integration with ServiceNow and in the reporting features."
"We have compliance needs. We have investigation needs. And we have situations where an analyst needs to look at threats. These three things require a different view of how they look at the threats. What would be good is to have Securonix create three different views of their Security Command Center so that, depending on the persona of the person logging in, they'd get the relevant data they need and not see everything."
"One of the things they can improve on a little bit is the usability side, to make some things simpler... The tool does have a lot of knobs, you can turn a lot of things on and off and you can change things. Sometimes, it can become a little overwhelming. They should remove some confirmation options and make it simpler for the less mature customers and people who are still trying to grasp it."
"We have a lot of users who, because they're engineers and they're bringing down product data - where, at times, a top-level product could be 10,000 or 15,000 objects - it's difficult for us to determine what should be a concern and what shouldn't be a concern. We work with the Securonix folks to try to come up with better ways to identify that."
"The pricing. I'm not sure how they are proceeding with the identity based pricing compared with DB pricing which most of the vendors are using today."
"It's a per gigabyte cost for ingestion of data. For every gigabyte that you ingest, it's whatever you negotiated your price for. Compared to other contracts that we've had for cloud providers, it's significantly less."
"We have an OEM agreement with Devo. It is very similar to the standard licensing agreement because we are charged in the same way as any other customer, e.g., we use the backroom."
"We have seen ROI. We have seen cost savings in maintenance, upkeep, and support."
"I'm not involved in the financial aspect, but I think the licensing costs are similar to other solutions. If all the solutions have a similar cost, Devo provides more for the money."
"Devo is definitely cheaper than Splunk. There's no doubt about that. The value from Devo is good. It's definitely more valuable to me than QRadar or LogRhythm or any of the old, traditional SIEMs."
"[Devo was] in the ballpark with at least a couple of the other front-runners that we were looking at. Devo is a good value and, given the quality of the product, I would expect to pay more."
"We have an annual license. We pay $200,000 for the base licensing and we pay another $50,000 for the software as a service."
"A good thing about Securonix is that they don't charge by volume of data or number of devices... They charge by the number of employees, which is a much more predictable number for me, versus data. Our costs are in the $100,000 range over a three-year subscription."
"We have a license from our 5.0, so that license just continued. We paid them the extra cloud-hosting costs for a year which were about $300,000."
"We went in on a three-year agreement which has an annual licensing fee, based upon the number of people that we're monitoring. There have not been any additional costs to the standard licensing fees."
Earn 20 points
Devo is the only cloud-native logging and security analytics platform that releases the full potential of all your data to empower bold, confident action when it matters most. Only the Devo platform delivers the powerful combination of real-time visibility, high-performance analytics, scalability, multitenancy, and low TCO crucial for monitoring and securing business operations as enterprises accelerate their shift to the cloud.
DNIF offers solutions to the world’s most challenging cybersecurity problems. Recognized by Gartner and used by some of the well-known global companies like PwC, Vodafone and Tata, this next generation analytics platform combines Security and Big Data Analytics to provide real-time threat detection and analytics to the most critical data assets on the Internet. With over a decade of experience in threat detection systems, DNIF has one of the fastest query response times and bridges the gap between searching, processing, analyzing and visualizing data thereby enabling companies with better SOC (Security Operations Center) management.
SNYPR is a next-generation security analytics platform that transforms big data into actionable security intelligence. Built on a Hadoop big data security lake, SNYPR combines an open data model, log management, security incident and event management (SIEM), user and entity behavior analytics (UEBA) and fraud detection into a complete, end-to-end platform that can be deployed in its entirety or in flexible, modular components.
See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.
DNIF is ranked 26th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 1 review while Securonix Security Analytics is ranked 3rd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 11 reviews. DNIF is rated 6.0, while Securonix Security Analytics is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of DNIF writes "Fast and stable but needs better intelligence feeds". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Securonix Security Analytics writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". DNIF is most compared with Splunk, IBM QRadar, ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), ELK Logstash and LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, whereas Securonix Security Analytics is most compared with Splunk, Exabeam Fusion SIEM, IBM QRadar, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM and LogRhythm Enterprise UEBA.
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.