CrowdStrike Observability vs Devo comparison

"I find the most effective feature of CrowdStrike Observability to be its cloud vision and attack surface vision, which enhance network traffic analysis."

"The price is worth it."

"The intelligence database provided by CrowdStrike is very impressive."

"The intelligence database provided by CrowdStrike is very impressive."

"The log aggregation and correlation of data are notable features that enhance our operations."

"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."

"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."

"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."

"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."

"Devo helps us to unlock the full power of our data because they have more than 450 parsers, which means that we can ingest pretty much any type of log data."

"It centralizes security management within a business, functioning as a core system for a SOC."

"The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean."

"Scalability is one of Devo's strengths."

"For reporting or log management, having a longer duration for backup without needing to purchase a paid subscription would be beneficial."

"The customer service is not satisfactory for me. The support is only available in English, and my users in LATAM regions such as Peru and Colombia require local language support, which is not currently provided."

"Integration with Huawei should be more straightforward."

"For reporting or log management, having a longer duration for backup without needing to purchase a paid subscription would be beneficial. Currently, there is a default ninety-day backup period."

"Integration with Huawei should be more straightforward."

"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."

"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."

"Technical support could be better."

"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."

"There are some issues from an availability and functionality standpoint, meaning the tool is somewhat slow. There were some slow response periods over the past six to nine months, though it has yet to impact us terribly as we are a relatively small shop. We've noticed it, however, so Devo could improve the responsiveness."

"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."

"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."

"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."

"Be cautious of metadata inclusion for log types in pricing, as there are some "gotchas" with that."

"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 is a hosted or subscription-based solution, whereas before, we purchased QRadar, so we owned it and just had to pay a maintenance fee. We've encountered this with some other products, too, where we went over to subscription-based. Our thought process is that with subscription based, the provider hosts and maintains the tool, and it's offsite. That comes with some additional fees, but we were able to convince our upper management it was worth the price. We used to pay under 10k a year for maintenance, and now we're paying ten times that. It was a relatively tough sell to our management, but I wonder if we have a choice anymore; this is where the market is."

"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'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."

"Our licensing fees are billed annually and per terabyte."

"I rate the pricing a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."

"Pricing is based on the number of gigabytes of ingestion by volume, and it's on a 30-day average. If you go over one day, that's not a big deal as long as the average is what you expected it to be."