Jordan MaurielloSVP of Managed Security at Critical Start
BiswabhanuPandaSenior Technical Consultant at Hitachi Systems Micro Clinic
SuhailWagleCyber Security Consultant at Gulf Business Machines
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 integration is very useful and very easy. You can have an API connection with any cloud and I'll be able to do both ways of communication with the help of APA."
"The product offers very strong automation. Our cyber security analysts don't have to correlate the information to detect problems. They only need to analyze problems that have been identified by the platform."
"I like that it's easy. It's got the protection set up, and we can see whatever is required. We write our own rules and the rules that we can input. I think it is good."
"It is kind of simple and very easily deployable. You can start working with it very fast."
"The ability to transition from microscopic to macroscopic view, instantly, is very good."
"Providing real-time visibility for threat detection and prioritization - QRadar SIEM provides contextual and actionable surveillance across the entire IT infrastructure."
"The most valuable features are the versatility of this solution and the variety of things you can do with it."
"We are using the platform version, which I like."
"The rule engine is very easy to use — very flexible."
"The solution can scale."
"The best part of this solution is having a third-party SOC."
"It is a pretty solid product for the type that it is representing. It is a CM solution as compared to Splunk or ArcSight from HP. It is also user friendly. It comes with some internal AI as well, in which it automatically maps multiple lots from unrelated devices and makes a smart decision to link them back and create an offense based on that. It is a smart tool."
"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."
"We have certain challenges with integrating the SOAR platform with multiple vendors."
"The graphical user interface could be improved. It's not easy to handle and it's not easy for a customer or end-user to learn how to manage the solution."
"Sometimes the rules are disabled by FireEye, and we basically get it after the patch. I think there needs to be a better way of creating the application rules. I would like to see better pricing for our licensing."
"It should have more cloud connectors. It could also be cheaper."
"I would like to see a better GUI."
"AI is superb but need improvements."
"The initial setup requires that you have somebody with the proper skill set, and it would help if the configuration were easier."
"We have had problems with networking."
"The user interface is a bit clunky, a bit hard to find what you need."
"The solution is clunky."
"The user interface is a bit difficult to get used to."
"A lot of information that we receive for the devices is IP-based, but it would help if we could have a default dashboard in which we can add more details about the assets for which we are receiving the information. For example, if it is a Windows or Linux device, we only get the IP for that particular device. We don't really get the name and other details of that particular device. For that, you have to drill down into your own asset management system. It would be good to have a place where we can probably add this information so that we don't have to look into other tools."
"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."
"The price could be better. But I think it's rightly placed when we buy everything in one shot, and we get some discount for that. That's how we basically plan our deployment, and it's holistic. We pay for the license yearly."
"It could be cheaper, but that applies to every product."
"It's not expensive for the resources that it gives you."
"It's very expensive but it fits our budget."
"It is a perpetual license that we have for the event collector. The licensing is done based on the number of events and flows that you receive on this particular device. These are perpetual licenses, which means once you purchase them, they don't expire, which means that the support to IBM is definitely renewed after every one year. We have an enterprise agreement with IBM, which puts the cost in a totally different category as compared to someone who is not an IBM partner and is approaching IBM for this solution. We were able to get massive discounts. To give you an idea, we recently purchased 30,000 event licenses, and it costs around $480,000. It is definitely not a cheap product. We have licenses for about 270,000 events per second and 3 million flows per second. All the appliances and their events and flows are basically clubbed together and charged or rather calculated through a single source. The console receives all the details from all the event processes that we have globally. So, the license that we have is a single license for 270,000 events per second and 3 million flows per second, but that can be managed centrally. I was only part of the secondary purchase, which was 30,000 events per second for about $480,000. You can calculate how much we paid for 270,000 events. Reducing its price would be a compromise. We have already used a lower-priced product in the form of NNT, but we had to get rid of it because it was not doing the job that we actually wanted to do. You get what you pay for."
"I feel that the price is reasonable but compared to other products that are on the market, such as an offering by Microsoft, it is more expensive."
"Its price is good in terms of efficiency and the number of people required for implementing various things. You might pay more in terms of money, but you might save on the number of people. For example, if you are using Kibana, you have to pay more for people or experts, which is not the case with IBM QRadar."
"It is costlier as compared to the other alternatives available in the market."
"I think that the price is fair, but we can always say that the price could be cheaper."
"It would be great if this product were cheaper."
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.
FireEye Helix is a cloud-hosted security operations platform that allows organizations to take control of any incident from alert to fix. Available with any FireEye solution, FireEye Helix integrates your security tools and augments them with next-generation SIEM, orchestration and threat intelligence capabilities to capture the untapped potential of security investments. Designed by security experts, for security experts, it empowers security teams to efficiently conduct primary functions, such as alert management, search, analysis, investigations and reporting.
The IBM QRadar security and analytics platform is a lead offering in IBM Security's portfolio. This family of products provides consolidated flexible architecture for security teams to quickly adopt log management, SIEM, user behavior analytics, incident forensics, and threat intelligence and more. As an integrated analytics platform, QRadar streamlines critical capabilities into a common workflow, with tools such as the IBM Security App Exchange ecosystem and Watson for Cyber Security cognitive capability.
With QRadar, you can decrease your overall cost of ownership with an improved detection of threats and enjoy the flexibility of on-premise or cloud deployment, and optional managed security monitoring services.
See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.
FireEye Helix is ranked 20th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 4 reviews while IBM QRadar is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 51 reviews. FireEye Helix is rated 8.8, while IBM QRadar is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of FireEye Helix writes "We can have an API connection with any cloud, the integration is very easy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM QRadar writes "Provides a single window into your network, SIEM, network flows, and risk management of your assets". FireEye Helix is most compared with Splunk, ServiceNow Security Operations, Azure Sentinel, Elastic SIEM and Splunk Phantom, whereas IBM QRadar is most compared with Splunk, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, ELK Logstash, Azure Sentinel and ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM). See our FireEye Helix vs. IBM QRadar 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.