We performed a comparison between NetCrunch and NetWitness Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Reporting on NetCrunch is pretty good. It's very similar to SolarWinds. It's just a different interface. The majority of everything there was beneficial."
"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."
"It gives the capability for the incident response team to correlate logs to identify any kind of problem like malware and incidents in a general sense, both for logs and packets."
"Incident management is its most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are the packet decoder, log decoder, and concentrator."
"The development of use cases on the SSA console is quite user friendly. This means that the security analyst or the researcher does not have to learn another language."
"Possibility to investigate incidents based on logs and raw packets, such as extracting files sent over the network"
"It's quite economical compared to other solutions in the market."
"NetWitness can be highly beneficial for incident detection and response."
"I didn't care for the role-based, permission-based options, which were not the best."
"Sometimes, it gives me static when integrating Windows-based systems. It should produce a precise log of sorts as to where the problem is. For example, a few days ago because of the McAfee application firewall, I couldn't get access to the particular Windows machine. So, my team and I had to figure out by ourselves that there was a virus responsible for the obstacle. This solution should trigger a meaningful log or message indicating the reason the user or implementer can't get into the machine."
"Log aggregation is an issue with this solution because there are a huge number of alerts in a single instance."
"The system looks like it is a mix of a bunch of different systems, and nothing looked like it was quite together."
"We have encountered issues with unresolved crashes."
"It is not so easy to customize this product."
"There is no support for this product in this country, so problems have to be resolved through global technical teams."
"It should have a monitoring feature. It would help us analyze the current state of attacks faster from a single platform."
"An area for improvement would be better automation and more inbuilt use cases."
Earn 20 points
NetCrunch is ranked 76th in Log Management while NetWitness Platform is ranked 19th in Log Management with 36 reviews. NetCrunch is rated 8.0, while NetWitness Platform is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of NetCrunch writes "A network monitoring platform with a useful reporting feature, but permission-based options could be better". 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". NetCrunch is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor and Fortinet FortiSIEM, whereas NetWitness Platform is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, RSA enVision, IBM Security QRadar, Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Microsoft Sentinel. See our NetCrunch vs. NetWitness Platform report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Log Management 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.
