No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Security Hub vs UnderDefense comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 8, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
AWS Security Hub
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (8th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (20th)
UnderDefense
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (22nd), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (10th), SOC as a Service (4th), Managed Detection and Response (MDR) (10th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (15th), Compliance Management (10th), AI-SOC (8th), AI-Powered Security Automation (4th)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
Misbah Mohammed Kollathodi - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineering Technical Leader Sre (Cloud/Kubernetes Security) at Cisco
Centralized compliance monitoring has strengthened our cloud security posture and daily governance
AWS Security Hub is something which I basically use to see how much your infrastructure is compliant. It is basically what we call a CSPM, which is a cloud security posture management tool. You can automate the best practices and continue with security best practices; it will give you your misconfigurations and aggregate all your tickets in one place. The best thing about AWS Security Hub is that it is a single point of place where you can get all your misconfigurations without having to go to each service and check. For example, if your business deals with any compliance like PCI DSS or FSBP and ISD, you can check how much your infrastructure is compliant with these standards. Each standard has several security controls, and AWS Security Hub checks these security controls and tells us what percentage your application and infrastructure is compliant with these standards. It also has integration with GuardDuty, Inspector, and other AWS services. In that aspect, it provides a lot of findings. It also supports some third-party product sources. I believe it will reduce your effort to correct those findings and can automate the security tests, consolidate the view of findings across accounts and providers. You can also apply remediation for these findings and automate that; for example, if somebody opens the security group, you can use tools such as Amazon Inspector to close this port when this finding comes. So I would say it is a good tool for cloud security, cloud security posture management, compliance management, and all these things. If you are dealing with sensitive data, it is very critical. A lot of people are using AWS Security Hub today in our company, maybe in every account we have. It is a must for cloud security. I believe bigger organizations use that, so it is a need for our security strategy.
Ivan Voitovych - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Urlicer
AI-driven SOC triage has transformed threat monitoring and keeps our security work focused
The best features UnderDefense offers include mostly triage in-context signals read together across my stack, where one finding replaces many separate checks. A good thing too is its false positive suppression, as I do not get false notifications. Normal activity such as traffic spikes during customer events is recognized and documented, and only the unusual cases reach me. It has full-time support 24/7 with proactive reports, and monitoring runs around the clock. Reports and alerts come to me without even noticing or asking, so it is very useful. My team sees what happened without having to chase it. I find the proactive reporting and 24/7 support to have definitely made a real difference. Proactive reports mean I hear about what happened without having to ask, so I know the state of things at the start of the day, and 24/7 support matters most for traffic spikes and other events outside busy working hours, as I get an answer when I need one without keeping someone on call just in case, saving me a lot of time. Together, they let my team stay on infrastructure work and step in only when a decision is needed. Regarding UnderDefense's AI capabilities, I think the governance and security is the best there is, as the decisions that matter stay with my team and each finding is documented, allowing me to review afterwards how a conclusion was reached. That control and traceability is what I need from AI in a security role. The accuracy and reliability of UnderDefense's AI output is accurate and steady, as findings have matched what I saw when I checked them, and the pattern assessments are consistent, especially during large traffic events or spikes, which is when I depend on them most. When a case needs judgment, the reasoning is there so I can confirm it myself.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions."
"The most valuable features of Torq for me are its drag-and-drop workflow automation, extensive integrations, and AI-powered alert summaries."
"According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the scanning of all the cloud environments and most of the compliances available in the cloud."
"The most valuable feature of AWS Security Hub is the ability to track when monitoring is not enabled on any of my resources."
"AWS Security Hub's unified dashboard does help streamline my process of identifying vulnerabilities, but we don't use Inspector."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easy to manage...It is a scalable solution."
"This solution is for security posture management for the cloud, showing the security posture of your cloud infrastructure and giving you good insight into whether your infrastructure is secure or not."
"The platform has valuable features for security."
"I find all of the features to be highly valuable."
"Routine signals are handled and documented, and only cases that need a human decision reach my team, allowing engineers to spend their time on infrastructure hardening instead of log digging."
"The linking, the filtering, and the readable reasoning each help on their own, but together, they allow a small security team to handle the volume our platform produces without losing sight of the cases that matter."
"UnderDefense Gen AI SOC flags behavior that breaks from an account's own baseline, lays out which signals triggered the alert and why it reads as different from normal activity, and helps our team decide within the same day whether we are seeing a legitimate big campaign push or a compromised login."
"Every morning we look at a short list of cases that matter instead of a long list of raw alerts, and each case comes with the full picture, so we can decide in a few minutes whether it needs action."
"UnderDefense groups it into one alert with the caller, the endpoint, and the usual pattern, which allows us to contact the customer the same day with facts in hand."
 

Cons

"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it still provides faster response and saves time."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"The case management piece, due to the platform being an automation-first tool, lacks real robust out-of-the-box case templates or good solutions for creating those without spending a lot of time doing development work, which makes the overall experience poor, honestly."
"Even now, we have workflows that are in production that use AI steps and I get different results, making it unusable to some degree."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"Adding SIEM features would be beneficial because of the limited customization of AWS Security Hub."
"There is room for improvement in implementing AI capabilities. It would be beneficial for Security Hub to implement preventative measures and to directly apply recommendations instead of just suggesting them."
"Security Hub is currently not worth investing in, as it requires more configurations and integration with other services to work effectively."
"The solution is not wholly self-sufficient."
"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."
"It is not flexible for multi-cloud environments."
"The support must be quicker."
"There is room for improvement in implementing AI capabilities."
"UnderDefense could improve in onboarding, which takes some dedicated time because the baseline for our high volume upload events needs to be set up first."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"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."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Feb 16, 2015
Cybereason vs. Interset vs. SQRRL
Capture DB - they all use NoSQL db and hence solve the ad hoc query and 'go back in time' problem with current best of breed SIEM and DLP solutions that rely on real time analysis of incoming logs (and don't store them). This means deeper and quicker iterative threat analysis and assessment…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
39%
Construction Company
13%
Security Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
Which is better - Azure Sentinel or AWS Security Hub?
We like that Azure Sentinel does not require as much maintenance as legacy SIEMs that are on-premises. Azure Sentinel...
What needs improvement with AWS Security Hub?
I do not see any areas for improvement in AWS Security Hub itself, but the cost factor is something that is the main ...
What is your primary use case for AWS Security Hub?
AWS Security Hub is something I have used daily as it is a part of my job for cloud security purposes. If you are dea...
What is your primary use case for UnderDefense?
Our main use case for UnderDefense Agentic AI SOC is to watch how accounts actually use our platform. Our product is ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for UnderDefense?
The experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been fair for what we get. Compared with building the same...
What needs improvement with UnderDefense?
UnderDefense could improve in onboarding, which takes some dedicated time because the baseline for our high volume up...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SQRRL
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
Kyte, Betsson Grourp, Mammut, Accedian.
Find out what your peers are saying about Splunk, Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft and others in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR). Updated: November 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.