DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs Trellix ESM comparison

"The solution is quite stable and offers good performance. It also works on a virtual machine. We haven't found any issues with it so far. It's been reliable."

"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."

"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."

"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."

"The response time on queries is super-fast."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of EPS it can handle."

"Has a great search capability."

"The User Behavior Analytics is a built-in threat-hunting feature. It detects and reports on any kind of malware or ransomware that enters the network."

"Scalability is quite easier with Trellix ESM, because all we need to do is add more receivers to it, so it can go to any point."

"It can be easily deployed with the other solutions."

"The most valuable feature is for the security operation center because it provides visibility of all traffic within the company infrastructure."

"The product’s most valuable feature is log monitoring."

"It enables us to detect malicious threats, issues, or vulnerabilities in our network."

"The solution is 100% stable. We really have had a great time working with it. It hasn't let us down."

"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. Over the years I have always been using this solution and have become comfortable with it."

"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."

"I feel that DNIF needs to invest more in marketing, considering that it operates at a very competitive speed."

"The vendor is fairly new and it's not as big as some of the international competitors. It's not a mature product. If you ask them to move data, it might take a lot of time."

"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."

"The EBA could be improved."

"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."

"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."

"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops... If this solution had a smart connector to these logs- Windows, Linux, or any other logs - without affecting the performance of the connector, that would be wonderful."

"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."

"I would like to see improvements to the user interface."

"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."

"The only drawback is that they don't have any packet capturing or network behavior analysis."

"I have to purchase a new box now. Its existing box is not scalable and I can't use it anymore."

"We need to improve Trellix ESM by making sure that most of the logging devices available in the global market should be covered, and if there is any device which is not covered, there should not be any additional charges for writing the custom parsers on that."

"The product's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"The solution needs to improve case management. The UI is confusing."

"The only issue I have with McAfee is the amount of computer resources that it takes... it's definitely impacting some of the other applications that are running on a computer at the same time."

"The pricing is based on the log size."

"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 licensing cost is based on EPS."

"The product is slightly expensive."

"The cost is dependent on the customer's environment and requirements."

"The pricing is good, and they are competitive compared to providers such as RSA and IBM QRadar."

"Regarding pricing, Trellix ESM is not that expensive. It's less than half the cost of IBM QRadar."

"The cost is all included. The finance department handles the financial part, and we mostly don't get involved in it."

"McAfee is the right choice for a low-budget solution."

"The price of McAfee ESM is higher than some of the other solutions. There are additional features that can be added at an additional fee."