We performed a comparison between AWS Security Hub and Elastic Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has a lot of great features."
"The dashboard that allows me to view all the incidents is the most valuable feature."
"It's pretty powerful and its performance is pretty good."
"The SOAR playbooks are Sentinel's most valuable feature. It gives you a unified toolset for detecting, investigating, and responding to incidents. That's what clearly differentiates Sentinels from its competitors. It's cloud-native, offering end-to-end coverage with more than 120 connectors. All types of data logs can be poured into the system so analysis can happen. That end-to-end visibility gives it the advantage."
"The most valuable feature is the onboarding of the workloads. You can see all that has been onboarded in your account on the dashboards."
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"It is able to connect to an ever-growing number of platforms and systems within the Microsoft ecosystem, such as Azure Active Directory and Microsoft 365 or Office 365, as well as to external services and systems that can be brought in and managed. We can manage on-premises infrastructure. We can manage not just the things that are running in Azure in the public cloud, but through Azure Arc and the hybrid capabilities, we can monitor on-premises servers and endpoints. We can monitor VMware infrastructure, for instance, running as part of a hybrid environment."
"Mainly, this is a cloud-native product. So, there are zero concerns about managing the whole infrastructure on-premises."
"Cloudposse is a valuable feature as it guarantees my security."
"The solution shows us our compliance score."
"The most valuable feature of AWS Security Hub is the ability to track when monitoring is not enabled on any of my resources."
"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."
"Finding out if your infrastructure is secure is a valuable feature."
"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."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the scanning of all the cloud environments and most of the compliances available in the cloud."
"Currently, our organization utilizes AWS for various purposes, including SaaS (Software as a Service), PaaS (Platform as a Service), and hosting applications in the cloud. We develop our applications and use AWS services as a platform for basic functions and secondary development needs. Additionally, we rely on PaaS for accounting services. Approximately, 50% of our applications are hosted in the cloud environment, making it a significant part of our current setup."
"The cost is reasonable. It's not overly pricey."
"Elastic is straightforward, easy to integrate, and highly customizable."
"The solution is quite stable. The performance has been good."
"The feature that we have found the most valuable is scalability."
"Enables monitoring of application performance and the ability to predict behaviors."
"What customers found most valuable in Elastic Security feature-wise is the search capability, in particular, the way of writing the search query and the speed of searching for results."
"Elastic Security is a highly flexible platform that can be implemented anywhere."
"The stability of the solution is good."
"The learning curve could be improved. I am still learning it. We were able to implement the basic features to get them up and running, but there are still so many things that I don't know about all its features. They have a lot of features that we have not been able to use or apply. If they could work on reducing the solution's learning curve, that would be good. While there is a training course held by Microsoft to learn more about this solution, there is a cost associated with it."
"Its documentation is not so simple. It is easy for somebody who is Microsoft certified or more closely attached to Microsoft solutions. It is not easy for those who are working on open-source platforms. There isn't a central point where everything is documented, and there is no specific training or certification."
"The dashboards can be improved. Creating dashboards is very easy, but the visualizations are not as good as Microsoft Power BI. People who are using Microsoft Power BI do not like Sentinel's dashboards."
"The data connectors for third-party tools could be improved, as some aren't available in Sentinel. They need to be available in the data connector panel."
"The playbook development environment is not as rich as it should be. There are multiple occasions when we face problems while creating the playbook."
"There is some relatively advanced knowledge that you have to have to properly leverage Sentinel's full capabilities. I'm thinking about things like the creation of workbooks, how you do threat-hunting, and the kinds of notifications you're getting... It takes time for people to ramp up on that and develop a familiarity or expertise with it."
"Sentinel can be used in two ways. With other tools like QRadar, I don't need to run queries. Using Sentinel requires users to learn KQL to run technical queries and check things. If they don't know KQL, they can't fully utilize the solution."
"Everyone has their favorites. There is always room for improvement, and everybody will say, "I wish you could do this for me or that for me." It is a personal thing based on how you use the tool. I do not necessarily have those thoughts, and they are probably not really valuable because they are unique to the context of the user, but broadly, where it can continue to improve is by adding more connectors to more systems."
"The support must be quicker."
"AWS Security Hub's configuration and integration are areas where it lacks and needs to improve."
"From an improvement perspective, there is a need to add more compliance since, right now, AWS Security Hub only provides four to five compliances to control the tool."
"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."
"It's not user-friendly. Too much going on, too many unnecessary findings, not very visual. You can't do much compared to other similar tools that are cheaper and better."
"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."
"The telemetry doesn't always go into the control center. When you have multiple instances running in AWS, you need a control tower to take feeds from Security Hub and analyze your results. Sometimes exemptions aren't passed between the control tower and Security Hub. The configuration gets mixed up or you don't get the desired results."
"The solution lacks self-sufficiency."
"Elastic has one problem. In the past, Elastic Security was free. Now, they currently only offer the basic license or a certain period of time."
"We had issues with scalability. Logstash was not scaling and aggregation was getting delayed. We moved to Fluentd making our stack from ELK to EFK."
"Elastic Security can be a bit difficult to use if a person only has experience in SMBs with tools like Zoho. The product can also be difficult for those who have never dealt with query language."
"The biggest challenge has been related to the implementation."
"We're using the open-source edition, for now, I think maybe they can allow their OLED plugin to be open source, as at the moment it is commercialised."
"The tool needs to integrate with legacy servers. Big companies can have legacy servers that may not always be updated."
"The tool should improve its scalability."
"With Elastic Security, the challenge arises from the fact that there is a learning curve in relation to queries and understanding the query language provided to extract usable data."
AWS Security Hub is ranked 9th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 16 reviews while Elastic Security is ranked 5th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 58 reviews. AWS Security Hub is rated 7.6, while Elastic Security is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AWS Security Hub writes "A centralized dashboard that enables efficient monitoring and management of possible security issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Elastic Security writes "A stable and scalable tool that provides visibility along with the consolidation of logs to its users". AWS Security Hub is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Splunk Enterprise Security and Google Chronicle Suite, whereas Elastic Security is most compared with Wazuh, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, IBM Security QRadar and CrowdStrike Falcon. See our AWS Security Hub vs. Elastic Security report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors and best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.
