"The most valuable feature for Cognito Detect, the main solution, is that external IDS's create a lot of alerts. When I say a lot of alerts I really mean a lot of alerts. Vectra, on the other hand, contextualizes everything, reducing the number of alerts and pinpointing only the things of interest. This is a key feature for me. Because of this, a non-trained analyst can use it almost right away."
"The key feature for me for Detect for Office 365 is that it can also concentrate all the information and detection at one point, the same as the network solution does. This is the key feature for me because, while accessing data from Office 365 is possible using Microsoft interfaces, they are not really user-friendly and are quite confusing to use. But Detect for Office 365 is aggregating all the info, and it's only the interesting stuff."
"The solution's ability to reduce alerts, by rolling up numerous alerts to create a single incident or campaign, helps in that it collapses all the events to a particular host, or a particular detection to a set of hosts. So it doesn't generate too many alerts. By and large, whatever alerts it generates are actionable, and actionable within the day."
"One of the most valuable features of the platform is its ability to provide you with aggregated risk scores based on impact and certainty of threats being detected. This is both applied to individual and host detections. This is important because it enables us to use this platform to prioritize the most likely imminent threats. So, it reduces alert fatigue follow ups for security operation center analysts. It also provides us with an ability to prioritize limited resources."
"Vectra produces actionable data using automation. That has helped us. It's less manpower now to look at incidents, which has definitely increased efficiency. Right now, in a lot of cases, our mean time to detection is within zero days. This tells me by the time something happened, and we were able to detect it, it was within the same day."
"The administrative privilege detection feature is the most valuable feature. The admin accounts are often highly accessible to the high-risk component of the environment. If those accounts are compromised or are being used in a suspicious manner, that's high-fidelity events for us to look into."
"The solution provide visibility into behaviors across the full lifecycle of an attack in our network, beyond just the Internet gateway. It makes our security operations much more effective because we are now looking not just at traffic on the border, but we're looking at east-west internal traffic. Now, not only will we see if an exploit kit is being downloaded, but we would be able to see then if that exploit kit was then laterally distributed into our environment."
"It keeps up with the network traffic, which is a good thing. It provides more context to plain alerts compared to using an older system. So, it helps an analyst reduce the information overload."
"We find that Stealthwatch can detect the unseen."
"Great network monitoring, looking at anomaly detection and evaluation."
"From what I understand, you can encrypt and unencrypt traffic moving in transit. This is one of the features that we liked about it."
"It has definitely helped us improve our mean time to resolution on network issues."
"It's easy to set up. The deployment takes one or two days. You need to collect the data from a device and then direct it to the portal."
"Overall, the implementation is very good."
"The VPN and the filtering features are the most valuable. Its VPN is very strong, and its services are very nice. The main problem in India is the service. There are not enough Check Point and Fortinet Firewall services, but for this product, the service is very good."
"The most important feature of this solution is the SLAs."
"It works right out of the box. You just have to enable it and you can start working."
"Vectra is still limited to packet management. It's only monitoring packet exchanges. While it can see a lot of things, it can't see everything, depending on where it's deployed. It has its limits and that's why I still have my SIEM."
"Some of their integrations with other sources of data, like external threat feeds, took a bit more work than I had hoped to get integrated."
"I would like to see data processed onshore. Right now, the cloud components, like Office 365, must be processed on servers outside of Australia. I would like to see a future adoption of onshore processing."
"The false positives and the tuning side of it is something that could use improvement. But that could be from our side."
"You are always limited with visibility on the host due to the fact that it is a network based tool. It gives you visibility on certain elements of the attack path, but it doesn't necessarily give you visibility on everything. Specifically, the initial intrusion side of things that doesn't necessarily see the initial compromise. It doesn't see stuff that goes on the host, such as where scripts are run. Even though you are seeing traffic, it doesn't necessarily see the malicious payload. Therefore, it's very difficult for it to identify these type of host-driven complex attacks."
"Some of the customization could be improved. Everything is provided for you as an easy solution to use, but working with it and doing specific development could be worked on a bit more in the scope of an incident response team."
"Integration with other security components needs improvement. It should have true integration as opposed to just being a separate pane of glass."
"I would like more integrations with IOCs and threats currently on the Internet. I would also like to know which threats are based on zero-day attacks, current botnets, etc. Therefore, I would like more information on external threats."
"We would like the solution to make more advances in the way that Extreme Networks has been doing."
"Cisco could improve the administration for the customers."
"Many of these tools require extensive on-premises hardware to run."
"It's a good solid solution but integration with Network Access Control products with Cisco ISE would be good."
"We determined that Stealthwatch wouldn't provide the machine learning model that we required."
"The visualization could be improved, the GUI is not the best."
"Regarding technical support, they could use more engineers."
"Its graphical user interface could be improved because not everybody is technical. There is a lack of knowledge, and they can give some training for this solution."
"Multi properties could be added to the solution in the future to make it better."
More WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Stealthwatch is ranked 4th in Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) with 6 reviews while WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is ranked 23rd in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 3 reviews. Cisco Stealthwatch is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Stealthwatch writes "Provides valuable security knowledge and helps us improve network performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service writes "Provides easy-to-use, real-time protection but the customer support could be improved". Cisco Stealthwatch is most compared with Darktrace, SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer, Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention, ThousandEyes and Cisco Stealthwatch Cloud, whereas WatchGuard Intrusion Prevention Service is most compared with Cisco Sourcefire SNORT and Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System.
We monitor all Network Traffic Analysis (NTA) 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.
