AWS Security Hub vs DNIF HYPERCLOUD comparison

"Easily integrates with third-party tools"

"I find all of the features to be highly valuable."

"AWS Security Hub provides comprehensive alerts about potential compliance issues with CIS standards. The integration with third-party tools is another excellent feature. All our workloads are on AWS."

"AWS Security Hub has very good integration features. It allows for AWS native services integration, and it helps us to integrate some of the services outside of AWS. They have partners, such as Amazon Preferred Network Partners (APN). If you have different security tools around APN, we can integrate those findings with AWS Security Hub reducing the need to refer to different portals or different UIs. You can have AWS Security Hub act as a single common go-to dashboard."

"Within AWS Security Hub, there is a feature for aggregating and prioritizing security findings which allows for better risk prioritization based on misconfiguration, as they know AWS thoroughly."

"I really like the seamless integration with the AWS account structure. It can even be made mandatory as part of the landing zone. These are great features. And there's a single pane of glass for the entire account."

"One of the most effective features of AWS Security Hub is the easy access to a dashboard with a ready-to-use security score."

"The best feature of AWS Security Hub is that you can get compliance or your cloud's current security posture."

"I like the MITRE table, a feature I saw for the first time in the same solution. There was one MITRE tactic table, which can be used to identify threats if you have all kinds of rules enabled or if you have rules for all the tactics in the MITRE table. There are 14 tables in MITRE, and those 14 tables consist of multiple columns, tactics, and techniques. It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table. On that basis, you can create new rules and identify existing ones. At any point, if an alert is triggered, it will try to match it to any of those MITRE tactics. I liked that creating a workbook on MITRE business was straightforward. I also like that you can search using SQL or DQL."

"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."

"Has a great search capability."

"The response time on queries is super-fast."

"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."

"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."

"The User Behavior Analytics is a built-in threat-hunting feature. It detects and reports on any kind of malware or ransomware that enters the network."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of EPS it can handle."

"Shortening the response time for support tickets, particularly in production issues, could make the service more efficient."

"AWS Security Hub should improve the time it takes to update. It takes a long period of time when updating. It can take 24 hours sometimes to update. Additionally, when integrating this solution with more security tools, takes time."

"Many findings are too generic or irrelevant to the environment, which can lead to false positives."

"There is room for improvement in implementing AI capabilities."

"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."

"Security needs to be measured based on their own criteria. We can't add custom criteria specific to our organization. For example, having an S3 bucket publicly available might be flagged as a critical alert, but it might not be critical in a sandbox environment. So, it gets flagged as critical, which becomes a false positive. So, customization options and creating custom dashboards would be areas for improvement."

"The solution lacks self-sufficiency."

"Although AWS Security Hub does a periodic scan of your overall infrastructure, it doesn't do it in real time."

"I feel that DNIF needs to invest more in marketing, considering that it operates at a very competitive speed."

"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."

"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."

"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."

"The EBA could be improved."

"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."

"I think DNIF HYPERCLOUD can implement the ability to export more than 100,000. At the moment, we can't go beyond that. So many times, if you're checking for the firewall logs and working on something related to authentication or network-related traffic, while that log count is low, the account goes beyond that. You can't restrict the logs or the amount of data you can export. It's very important for my situation. It would be better if they could increase the capacity of exports. Although there are many more types of searching in DNIF HYPERCLOUD, people still struggle to query out what they want because not everyone is good at SQL or DQL. The easiest way to query out in DNIF is using the GUI-based interface. But in the GUI interface, you can use operator calls. It gets tricky when you want to search for a specific type of event. You don't know where it will be passed and whether it will be consistent. In the initial phase, it's tough for us to use DNIF. You cannot pass every event in a stable DNIF. When we used that particular tool, we used to get those logs, but sometimes many things are not getting passed. So, we used to export the sheet or export the data into Excel and weigh the required details. In the next release, I would like them to improve the export of the columns and make the application more user-friendly. I would also like a threat-hunting feature in the next release."

"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops... If this solution had a smart connector to these logs- Windows, Linux, or any other logs - without affecting the performance of the connector, that would be wonderful."

"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."

"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."

"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."

"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."

"The cost is based on the number of compliances, core checks, and services required, and for more than 10,000 recommendations, the charge is just one dollar."

"AWS Security Hub is not an expensive tool. I would consider it to be a cheap solution. AWS Security Hub follows the PAYG pricing model, meaning you will have to pay for whatever you use."

"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."

"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."

"The solution requires a huge infrastructure and that is costly."

"Price-wise, the product is quite economical. I rate the solution's price as three or four on a scale of one to ten, where one is considered to be a very economically priced tool."

"The pricing is based on the log size."