Elizabeth ManemannCyber Security Engineer at H&R Block, Inc.
Anonymous UserSplunker, Networking and E-Mail Security Architect, Engineer and Guru at a healthcare 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 most valuable features are simplicity and ease of integration."
"The automation part and the playbook creation part are awesome. The way it is responding to the customers and incidents is also very good. In the SOC environment, I guess it will carry out around 50% of the work."
"The pricing is very good."
"The automation is excellent."
"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 solution is very reliable."
"It has an extensive list of integrations that are available out of the box which makes it easy to start."
"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. I would go as far as to say the product is deficient in its ability to parse multiple, different log types, including logs from major vendors that are supported by competitors. Additionally, the time that it takes to turn around a supported parser for customers and common log source types, which are generally accepted standards in the industry, is not acceptable. This has impacted customer onboarding and customer relationships for us on multiple fronts."
"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."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"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 user interface could be a bit better."
"When Palo Alto bought the solution, the pricing increased by 1.5 times. There's been a 50% increase, which is a lot."
"There should be an on-premise version available for customers to have different choices."
"The solution is very expensive."
"I would love to see more flexibility on what we can display and design on the dashboards."
"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."
"Be cautious of metadata inclusion for log types in pricing, as there are some "gotchas" with that."
"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."
"There is a perception that it is priced very high compared to other solutions."
"From the cost perspective, I have heard that its price is a bit high as compared to other similar products."
"There is a yearly license required for this solution and it is expensive."
"It is approx $10,000 or $20,000 per year for two user licenses."
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.
Demisto Enterprise delivers a complete solution that helps Tier-1 through Tier-3 analysts and SOC managers to optimize the entire incident life cycle while auto documenting and journaling all the evidence. More than 100+ integrations enable security orchestration workflows for incident management and other critical security operation tasks.
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 Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 3rd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 7 reviews. FireEye Helix is rated 8.8, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Easy to use, stable, scalable, and has responsive support". FireEye Helix is most compared with Splunk, ServiceNow Security Operations, IBM QRadar, Azure Sentinel and ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Splunk Phantom, Fortinet FortiSOAR, IBM Resilient, ServiceNow Security Operations and Siemplify.
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.