We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"Those 400 days of hot data mean that people can look for trends and at what happened in the past. And they can not only do so from a security point of view, but even for operational use cases. In the past, our operational norm was to keep live data for only 30 days. Our users were constantly asking us for at least 90 days, and we really couldn't even do that. That's one reason that having 400 days of live data is pretty huge. As our users start to use it and adopt this system, we expect people to be able to do those long-term analytics."
"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 most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"Devo provides a multi-tenant, cloud-native architecture. This is critical for managed service provider environments or multinational organizations who may have subsidiaries globally. It gives organizations a way to consolidate their data in a single accessible location, yet keep the data separate. This allows for global views and/or isolated views restricted by access controls by company or business unit."
"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."
"It's very, very versatile."
"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 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."
"The most valuable feature is user behavior analytics (UBA)."
"Overall a great solution."
"The threat hunting capabilities in general are great."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the integration capabilities on offer."
"When it comes to QRadar, they can do the correlation and not only in networks but also endpoints. This is one of the good features that we have noticed."
"The solution is flexible and easy to use."
"Providing real-time visibility for threat detection and prioritization - QRadar SIEM provides contextual and actionable surveillance across the entire IT infrastructure."
"We've found the technical support to be very good."
"From our experience, the Devo agent needs some work. They built it on top of OS Query's open-source framework. It seems like it wasn't tuned properly to handle a large volume of Windows event logs. In our experience, there would definitely be some room for improvement. A lot of SIEMs on the market have their own agent infrastructure. I think Devo's working towards that, but I think that it needs some improvement as far as keeping up with high-volume environments."
"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."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"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."
"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."
"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."
"Technical support could be better."
"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."
"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."
"The solution is clunky."
"There are a lot of things they are working on and a lot of technologies that are not yet there. They should probably work out a better reserve with their ecosystem of business partners and create wider and more in-depth qualities, third-party tools, and add-ons. These things really give immediate business value. For instance, there are many limitations in using SAP, EBS, or Micro-Dynamics. A lot of things that are happening in those platforms could also be monitored and allowed from the cybersecurity risks perspective. IBM might be leaving this gap or empty space for business partners. Some larger organizations might already be doing this. It would be very nice if IBM can make some artificial intelligence part free of charge for all current QRadar users. This would be a big advantage as compared to other competitors. There are companies that are going in different directions. Of course, you can't do everything inside QRadar. In general, it might be very good for all players to provide more use cases, especially regarding data protection and leakage prevention. There are some who are already doing some kind of file integrity or gathering some more information from all possible technologies for building anything related to the user and data analysis, content analysis, and management regarding the data protection."
"There could be better integration with the solution."
"The solution should enhance its capabilities of UEBA and AI/ML tech modeling."
"I would like to see a better GUI."
"Pricing model could be more cost-effective."
"The whole process for support is something that needs to be improved."
"I don't look at only the features and benefits; I also look at the price. It is a bit expensive when compared with other solutions. It is expensive for specific deployment topologies, and the decision-makers go for alternatives like ArcSight. It should also have more AI features or capabilities for better threat intelligence. The more it uses machine learning, the better would be the dashboard, analytics, and other things."
"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."
"Be cautious of metadata inclusion for log types in pricing, as there are some "gotchas" with that."
"Our licensing fees are billed annually and per terabyte."
"Devo was very cost-competitive... Devo did come with that 400 days of hot data, and that was not the case with other products."
"I like the pricing very much. They keep it simple. It is a single price based on data ingested, and they do it on an average. If you get a spike of data that flows in, they will not stick it to you or charge you for that. They are very fair about that."
"[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 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."
"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."
"The solution is priced fairly, there is a license for the solution, and we pay annually."
"There is a license required for this solution. There are some limitations depending on what license you purchase."
"IBM QRadar is a little bit expensive compared to other products."
"The price could be better. I bought a subscription for three years."
"There is a license to use this solution, which is paid annually. However, there are subscription options available."
"It is costlier as compared to the other alternatives available in the market."
"There is a license required for this solution."
"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."
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.
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.
DNIF is ranked 25th in Log Management with 1 review while IBM QRadar is ranked 2nd in Log Management with 57 reviews. DNIF is rated 6.0, while IBM QRadar is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of DNIF writes "Fast and stable but needs better intelligence feeds". 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". DNIF is most compared with Splunk, ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), ELK Logstash, Fortinet FortiAnalyzer and LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, whereas IBM QRadar is most compared with Splunk, LogRhythm NextGen SIEM, ELK Logstash, Microsoft Sentinel and ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM).
We monitor all Log Management 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.