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

DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs Microsoft Purview Audit comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 2024

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

DNIF HYPERCLOUD
Ranking in Log Management
46th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (46th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (19th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (28th)
Microsoft Purview Audit
Ranking in Log Management
35th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (31st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Log Management category, the mindshare of DNIF HYPERCLOUD is 1.1%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Audit is 1.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Log Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Purview Audit1.1%
DNIF HYPERCLOUD1.1%
Other97.8%
Log Management
 

Featured Reviews

Kishore Tiwari - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy General Manager - Information Security (Lead ISA) at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Development from open sources is very valuable but a huge infrastructure is required
The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used. The search configuration is a bit different than other OEMs or SIEM solutions like ArcSight or QRadar that are easy to search because they operate similarly. The logic is there and the solution supplies a pretty good explanation. Basically, DNIF spelled out is the opposite of FIND. You have to find commands whenever you want to search something. For example, a highway gets you to your destination but there is an alternate way people don't yet know about. Gartner or Forrester haven't yet studied it. We were a bit nervous when we were trying to get familiar with the solution. We wondered if we could realize ROI because the commands and ways of pulling data were different to us. We raised a case with the support team and their professionals provided the needed support. The command line is user friendly once you understand it. If you need immediate use, then you might want to get assistance from someone who is well-versed in methods for using key patterns to find things. Lengthier files for threat hunting or analysis are needed. The correlation happens, but exporting a large number of files to abstract them is not possible. For example, I want to present raw data to management so I should be able to customize a date range in my query and download the files.
OK
Cloud Solution Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Integrated auditing has strengthened data retention and improved incident investigations
I have seen areas for improvement, specifically in Microsoft Purview Audit or in general about Microsoft. I have had a situation with documentation. I had a customer who wanted to create alerts and they had Microsoft 365 Business Premium. In the documentation, it was noted that this license is enough for creating alerts. When we tried to make them, we noticed they cannot do it with Microsoft 365 E3 because the customer had limited features to manage alerts. The customer had to buy E3. We created Microsoft support requests, and they confirmed that the documentation displayed not the real situation and they have been going to update documentation. The same situation occurred now with implementing Microsoft Purview Audit in the last autumn. eDiscovery was combined with search and content search, and the documentation was not clear at the beginning. It was a little difficult to describe to customers that now it is a part of eDiscovery. Content search is a very simple functionality, while eDiscovery is a little difficult. I am not entirely sure why Microsoft is going in the way of combining these services because they are the same. However, for a customer who has never seen these services, it is difficult to understand quickly. The same situation occurs with litigation holds and some other holds. For any mail, I am trying to keep data. For example, emails are held for a year or two years, ten years, it does not matter. It is difficult to understand where to find this data and where these emails are being held. I need to use eDiscovery to find out all deleted data that was kept somewhere in some hidden folders of the mailbox. Regular customers and regular administrators know that on-premises Exchange, for example, allows them to find the data in some repository and review the list of kept data. However, with this hold, we do not have any functionality to review the list of kept data. It is difficult to understand for customers how to work with this. I had a case where I spent three or four hours working deeply with a customer to explain how to work with eDiscovery, why Content Search is not there when it was before, what is an eDiscovery case, and why we are talking about all of this just to review a list of kept emails. This is difficult.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."
"It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table."
"DNIF is much faster, much more responsive, and far superior when compared to competitive tools."
"Has a great search capability."
"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."
"If you're an enterprise company and want to scale your productivity for log monitoring purposes, I found DNIF a better option than Splunk which has more complex software."
"The solution is quite stable and offers good performance, it also works on a virtual machine and we haven't found any issues with it so far, it's been reliable."
"The benefit of DNIF was that the solution was able to detect any anomalies and identify and prevent any possible security threats or attacks."
"The platform has significantly enhanced our operational insight into the overall Microsoft 365 environment."
"The main Microsoft feature is that it offers common integration of services, of data, of identity, meaning user accounts, user access, and privileged access."
"We're easily saving at least one hour per day using this solution."
"The overall user experience with Microsoft Purview Audit is of higher quality than when it was branded as Compliance Center, and Microsoft consistently updates and evolves functionalities and the overall experience."
 

Cons

"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."
"The EBA could be improved."
"I feel that DNIF needs to invest more in marketing, considering that it operates at a very competitive speed."
"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."
"I used version 8 which was not at all stable. The services and processor keep going down, we had to manually keep them up increasing storage space because services are down, and logs not processed."
"DNIF HYPERCLOUD is not a stable product compared to other tools like IBM QRadar."
"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."
"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."
"We are still in the early stages of leveraging Microsoft Purview Audit. Currently, it's primarily used for the audit function."
"We do have a Denial of Access happening."
"Areas for product improvement include enhancing customization options and integrating more comprehensive compliance features."
"I had a case where I spent three or four hours working deeply with a customer to explain how to work with eDiscovery, why Content Search is not there when it was before, what is an eDiscovery case, and why we are talking about all of this just to review a list of kept emails."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview Audit?
It is not so expensive in comparison with other products, but I can tell you about an example.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Audit?
I have seen areas for improvement, specifically in Microsoft Purview Audit or in general about Microsoft. I have had a situation with documentation. I had a customer who wanted to create alerts and...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Audit?
I work with Defender for IoT by chance because I see that we have enough reviews for Defender for Office 365 today, and we need reviews for some Azure products. I work with Azure products such as L...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), ICICI Bank, Yes Bank, Tata Motors, RBL Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs. Microsoft Purview Audit and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.