We performed a comparison between McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] and Oracle Audit Vault based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Imperva, Oracle and others in Database Security."The feature I have found most valuable is activity monitoring."
"The support is very good. They are very quick to respond when we have issues."
"The technical support is good; they are knowledgeable."
More McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] Pros →
"A powerful, flexible solution for database traffic monitoring."
"Technical support is perfect."
"It is a good product for controlling all databases. It is helpful for auditing the data. When people are doing any actions on the databases, they are recorded automatically in the vault. You can work on the collected data to find out exactly what is happening on a database. You can implement database encryption on the databases to control people's access to the database content, such as rows and tables."
"It has provided us with a unique opportunity to automate risk discovery."
"This solution acts as a complete data warehouse for our audit data."
"The solution is very stable and reliable."
"All of the other components that make up the infrastructure in the environment including the operating system are also quite valuable."
"Our client was scheduled to take a year and a half to set up compliance, but by deploying this product they were able to do the compliance reports within three months."
"The UI needs to be improved."
"In the next feature, I'd like to see more integrations and updates overall, specifically bottom tech."
"Technical support could be more responsive."
More McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] Cons →
"Stability could be improved, we have had some challenges"
"Customized reporting is something that we are struggling with, and it is quite tough for us."
"We would like to see the ability to administer and manage the solution through Enterprise Manager 13c, and development of the dashboards that are generally missing."
"The product monitors only the database and not the operating systems."
"The support could improve."
"I hear from many people that say IBM Guardian is better than Oracle Audit Vault when it comes to performance. IBM Guardian works transparently in the database, but Oracle Audit Vault consumes some ratios on the server."
"Currently, you need two servers: one for Audit Vault and one for the firewall. If they can combine them into one server, it will be great because it is costly to have two servers. It will also make its installation easier. I have heard that in the new version, there will be only one server for both."
"An easy, friendly user interface would be nice to have, since this would enable administrators to identify important events with a prompt response."
More McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Database Security with 3 reviews while Oracle Audit Vault is ranked 3rd in Database Security with 28 reviews. McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] is rated 7.6, while Oracle Audit Vault is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] writes "The solution's activity monitoring is valuable, but it should have more integrations and updates overall". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Audit Vault writes "Enhanced interface, agentless, and simple setup". McAfee Vulnerability Manager for Databases [EOL] is most compared with Imperva SecureSphere Database Security, whereas Oracle Audit Vault is most compared with IBM Security Guardium Data Protection, Imperva SecureSphere Database Security, Trustwave DbProtect, DB Networks DBN-6300 and DataSunrise Database Security.
See our list of best Database Security vendors.
We monitor all Database Security 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.
