We performed a comparison between McAfee ESM and Securonix Next-Gen SIEM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"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."
"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."
"The alerting is much better than I anticipated. We don't get as many alerts as I thought we would, but that nobody's fault, it's just the way it is."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."
"The most valuable feature is the correlation rules."
"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."
"The most valuable features of McAfee ESM are intrusion detection, malware protection, and the device controller."
"It is user-friendly. The notification part of McAfee ESM is very easy."
"It enables us to detect malicious threats, issues, or vulnerabilities in our network."
"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."
"McAfee as a whole is a good solution."
"I like the ease of deployment."
"The detection of threats and reduction of false positive alarms as compared to other solutions are valuable features. It has improved threat detection response and reduced a lot of noise from false positives as compared to our previous SIEM solutions."
"The most valuable feature is what Securonix calls enrichment. Securonix is very powerful because of all the data it can process and automatically enrich. The actionable intelligence it provides is one of its benefits, due to the processing capacity it has."
"I rate the technical support a nine out of ten. They're friendly. Whenever we have a P1 issue, we write an email and our issue is resolved in one or two hours."
"The most valuable feature is that it works on user behavior and event rarities."
"The user interface is easy to learn and navigate."
"We can customize our use cases with the tools provided by Securonix. It is an excellent tool that can ingest data in different ways and is very flexible."
"One of the most valuable features is the integration of all types of data sources to extract relevant information regarding events. It is a good solution when it comes to the correlations that it makes within all the data handled in our company."
"Risk scoring was nice. We could exactly see which user had the highest risk score, and then we could pick it up and work on it."
"Some of the documentation could be improved a little bit. A lot of times it doesn't go as deep into some of the critical issues you might run into. They've been really good to shore us up with support, but some of the documentation could be a little bit better."
"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."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"The biggest area with room for improvement in Devo is the Security Operations module that just isn't there yet. That goes back to building out how they're going to do content and larger correlation and aggregation of data across multiple things, as well as natively ingesting CTI to create rule sets."
"An admin who is trying to audit user activity usually cannot go beyond a day in the UI. I would like to have access to pages and pages of that data, going back as far as the storage we have, so I could look at every command or search or deletion or anything that a user has run. As an admin, that would really help. Going back just a day in the UI is not going to help, and that means I have to find a different way to do that."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
"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."
"It cannot integrate with our Next-Generation Firewall and few applications such as Cisco ACI."
"I would like to see good analytics in future releases."
"The initial setup is difficult and could improve."
"We acquired the IBM product because McAfee is slightly confusing to use, and it's broader."
"The support from McAfee ESM could improve. They could improve the speed."
"There should be support for multitenancy in the product."
"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."
"Cloud integration has room for improvement because they're not full-fledged to integrate with the cloud solutions that come. They use different integration platforms to bring in data, and that needs to be improved."
"The analytics-driven approach for finding sophisticated threats and reducing false positives is positive and good, but the platform requires a more dynamic concept. Everything is a bit static."
"Sometimes, there is instability in the data in terms of the customization of the time. I have sometimes observed discrepancies in the data, which is something they should work on. They should bring more stability to time customization. If we are seeing a particular data, when we change the time zone, there should be the same data. There should not be any discrepancy."
"Sometimes, the injectors lag and are not loading. It would be nice if that could be improved."
"We would like to see better integration with other products."
"Parsing needs to be improved. Every time we integrate a new, specific data source, we face a lot of problems in parsing, even for the old data source."
"It could be improved a little bit more for admin users. There should be more administrative options related to security for admin users. For example, for forensic purposes, the admin should be able to stop a specific user from erasing some information. I would be helpful in certain situations, such as during an internal fraud."
"The incident response area should be improved."
"Securonix could open up information regarding the indicators of compromise or cyber-threat intelligence database that they use. The idea is that they share what threats they are detecting."
See how Devo allows you to free yourself from data management, and make machine data and insights accessible.
McAfee ESM is ranked 22nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 8 reviews while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 4th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 13 reviews. McAfee ESM is rated 6.2, while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of McAfee ESM writes "A security information and event management solution with a useful search and reporting feature, but cloud integration could be better". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Playbooks integrations, incident management features, and threat hunting services saved time and streamlined investigations". McAfee ESM is most compared with IBM QRadar, Splunk, ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM), Microsoft Sentinel and FireEye Helix, whereas Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with Splunk, IBM QRadar, Exabeam Fusion SIEM, Microsoft Sentinel and Elastic Security. See our McAfee ESM vs. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.
