We performed a comparison between Microsoft Sentinel and NetWitness Platform 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 UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"It is easy to implement (turn on) - does need a skilled analyst to develop queries and playbooks."
"The best feature is that onboarding to the SIM solution is quite easy. If you are using cloud-based solutions, it's just a few clicks to migrate it."
"The ability of all these solutions to work together natively is essential. We have an Azure subscription, including Log Analytics. This feature automatically acts as one of the security baselines and detects recommendations because it also integrates with Defender. We can pull the sysadmin logs from Azure. It's all seamless and native."
"It has a lot of great features."
"I like the KQL query. It simplifies getting data from the table and seeing the logs. All you need to know are the table names. It's quite easy to build use cases by using KQL."
"The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance."
"Sentinel uses Azure Logic Apps for automation, which is really powerful. This allows us to easily automate responses to incidents."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"Performance and reporting are very good."
"The most valuable feature of RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets are the alerts and correlations tools."
"The software is scalable to whatever is required, and you can also put a lot of resources in the cloud."
"The solution is really scalable for the high-end power, enterprise customer."
"The most valuable features are its ingestion of logs and raising of alerts based on those logs."
"Alerting Module: It provides real-time event processing language on all the logs/packets stream for advanced alerting, i.e., using SQL LIKE statements."
"The packet capture aspect of it is a valuable feature because it is quite different from a traditional SIEM solution that only carries out investigations based on captured logs."
"If their UI was a bit more streamlined and easy to find when I need it, then that would be a great improvement."
"The playbook is a bit difficult and could be improved."
"Sentinel's alerts and notifications are not fully optimized for mobile devices. The overall reporting and the analytics processes for the end user should also be improved. Also, the compatibility and availability of data sources and reports are not always perfect."
"Sometimes, it is hard for us to estimate the costs of Microsoft Sentinel."
"In terms of features I would like to see in future releases, I'm interested in a few more use cases around automation. I do believe a lot of automation is available, and more is in progress, but that would be my area of interest."
"Azure Sentinel will be directly competing with tools such as Splunk or Qradar. These are very established kinds of a product that have been around for the last seven, eight years or more."
"Multi-tenancy, in my opinion, needs to be improved. I believe it can do better as a managed service provider."
"I can't think of anything other than just getting the name out there. I think a lot of customers don't fully understand the full capabilities of Azure Sentinel yet. It is kind of like when they're first starting to use Azure, it might not be something they first think about. So, they should just kind of get to the point where it is more widely used."
"The initial setup is complex. There are other solutions that are easier to implement."
"The product's licensing models are complex to understand. This particular area needs improvement."
"They should implement algorithms to digest that data and produce additional, more advanced reporting, alerting and support of internal security teams."
"The tool's integration capability isn't so great."
"I believe that integrating the solution with other products such as Oracle would be beneficial."
"RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets can improve the threat level aspect, it is lacking compared to other solutions. Whenever any hacking activity or any other threat factor occurred they used to provide the coverages very fast when comparing RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets. I heard the other three solutions, from a discussion with my team members who had experience in other solutions, they used to say that. Whenever any issues happened across the globe RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets are a little bit slow improving those detection mechanisms."
"The system architecture is complex and sometimes it’s hard to troubleshoot potential problems."
"There are instances where you try to run the reports and then it does not give you the desired outcome."
Microsoft Sentinel is ranked 1st in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 85 reviews while NetWitness Platform is ranked 16th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 36 reviews. Microsoft Sentinel is rated 8.2, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Sentinel writes "Gives a comprehensive and holistic view of the ecosystem and improves visibility and the ability to respond". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetWitness Platform writes "Can find out if there is lateral movement, but integration and workflow need improvement". Microsoft Sentinel is most compared with AWS Security Hub, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Splunk Enterprise Security and Elastic Security, whereas NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Trellix Network Detection and Response. See our Microsoft Sentinel vs. NetWitness Platform 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.
