We performed a comparison between DNIF HYPERCLOUD and Gurucul UEBA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 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 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."
"Has a great search capability."
"The response time on queries is super-fast."
"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."
"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."
"The reporting feature was the key differentiator. I also liked the ability to create dynamic rules in the environment."
"I appreciate the comprehensive categorization of devices based on their intended use, such as those for DNS."
"The most valuable feature of Gurucul is the ability to customize and it is on the Hadoop platform that has a lot of flexibility."
"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."
"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."
"The EBA could be improved."
"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."
"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."
"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."
"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."
"It could be more stable."
"Regarding the prioritization of threats, Gurucul UEBA needs to enhance its alert severity assignment process within the system."
"Gurucul can improve on the online documentation. They should educate the end users more to allow them to do everything themselves."
DNIF HYPERCLOUD is ranked 9th in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) with 7 reviews while Gurucul UEBA is ranked 11th in User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) with 3 reviews. DNIF HYPERCLOUD is rated 7.6, while Gurucul UEBA is rated 6.6. The top reviewer of DNIF HYPERCLOUD writes "Development from open sources is very valuable but a huge infrastructure is required". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Gurucul UEBA writes "Helped reduce our operational costs and increase our efficiency, but it can be more user-friendly". DNIF HYPERCLOUD is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel and Wazuh, whereas Gurucul UEBA is most compared with Exabeam Fusion SIEM, Securonix Next-Gen SIEM, Splunk User Behavior Analytics and Wazuh. See our DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs. Gurucul UEBA report.
See our list of best User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) vendors.
We monitor all User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) 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.
