Elizabeth ManemannCyber Security Engineer at H&R Block, Inc.
Anonymous UserSenior Security Specialist at a manufacturing company
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 solution is 100% stable. We really have had a great time working with it. It hasn't let us down."
"Compared to other solutions, the user interface is good."
"It is easy to use and deploy. It comes with user-friendly manuals."
"McAfee as a whole is a good solution."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation rules."
"It enables us to detect malicious threats, issues, or vulnerabilities in our network."
"It is user-friendly. The notification part of McAfee ESM is very easy."
"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."
"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."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"The only drawback is that they don't have any packet capturing or network behavior analysis."
"McAfee is no more providing security updates on this product, and the enhancements to this product seem to have stopped. Moreover, we don't get proper support, and we struggle to get its support. It would be good if they can add some AI engine and out of the box use cases because it is currently limited to the same scenario and the same setup. I have done a POC for Securonix, LogRhythm. These products are much more ahead as compared to McAfee ESM. They have included multiple modules in the same solution. Correlation is very easy. If McAfee ESM can improve, especially in such implementations, then I believe it would be much better."
"It cannot integrate with our Next-Generation Firewall and few applications such as Cisco ACI."
"There should be support for multitenancy in the product."
"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."
"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."
"Cloud integration has room for improvement because they're not full-fledged to integrate with the cloud solutions that come. They use different integration platforms to bring in data, and that needs to be improved."
"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."
"The pricing is good, and they are competitive compared to providers such as RSA and IBM QRadar."
"The cost is all included. The finance department handles the financial part, and we mostly don't get involved in it."
"We renew our license annually."
"McAfee is the right choice for a low-budget solution."
"The price is good. It's moderate. We follow a pay-as-you-go model. There are different models available, and they can also be monthly. You can choose monthly or yearly. It's very flexible. If our existing customers exceed the current plan, you can just call McAfee and get it extended."
"The pricing is fair."
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.
McAfee Enterprise Security Manager - the foundation of the security information and event management (SIEM) solution family from McAfee delivers the performance, actionable intelligence, and real-time situational awareness at the speed and scale required for security organizations to identify, understand, and respond to stealthy threats, while the embedded compliance framework simplifies compliance.
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 McAfee ESM is ranked 16th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 10 reviews. FireEye Helix is rated 8.8, while McAfee ESM is rated 6.6. 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 McAfee ESM writes "A security information and event management solution with a useful search and reporting feature, but cloud integration could be better". FireEye Helix is most compared with Splunk, ServiceNow Security Operations, IBM QRadar, Azure Sentinel and Elastic SIEM, whereas McAfee ESM is most compared with IBM QRadar, Splunk, ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), LogRhythm NextGen SIEM and Rapid7 InsightIDR. See our FireEye Helix vs. McAfee ESM 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.