We performed a comparison between NetWitness XDR and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Sentinel's most important feature is the ability to centralize all the logs in one place. There's no need to search multiple systems for information."
"We can use Sentinel's playbook to block threats. It covers all of the environment, giving us great visibility."
"The UI of Sentinel is very good and easy to use, even for beginners."
"The automation feature is valuable."
"It is quite efficient. It helps our clients in identifying their security issues and respond quickly. Our clients want to automate incident response and all those things."
"The AI and ML of Azure Sentinel are valuable. We can use machine learning models at the tenant level and within Office 365 and Microsoft stack. We don't need to depend upon any other connectors. It automatically provisions the native Microsoft products."
"The in-built SOAR of Sentinel is valuable. Kusto Query Language is also valuable for the ease of writing queries and ease of getting insights from the logs. Schedule-based queries within Sentinel are also valuable. I found these three features most useful for my projects."
"Previously, it was a little bit difficult to find where an incident came from, including which IP address and which country. So in Sentinel, it's very easy to find where the incident came from since we can easily get the information from the dashboard, after which we take action quickly."
"It is stable. We have been using it for some time, without any issues."
"The most valuable feature is the way it captures the traffic, and it contains every detail of the communication."
"It is very easy to use, and its usability is great. The use cases are also very easy. The visualizations of the use cases are magnificent. You cannot find this in any other solution. From my point of view, it is great."
"The log correlation is good."
"The stability of the RSA NetWitness Endpoint is very good."
"They have recently updated the features and the most valuable ones are the instant threat response, ease of use, web interface, integration, and easy access. RSA NetWitness Endpoint is very compatible with other solutions and technologies. However, they do not rely on third-party solutions and have most features built-in."
"Ability to isolate the machine when there are malicious files."
"RSA NetWitness does market analysis in a more granular form. It gives you full visibility."
"The automation is excellent."
"It was useful as a ticketing tool."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"I am satisfied with the product overall."
"The automation part and the playbook creation part are awesome. The way it is responding to the customers and incidents is also very good. In the SOC environment, I guess it will carry out around 50% of the work."
"The strengths of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR stem from the fact that it provides functionalities related to patching and URL blocking...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is its capability to automate responses and collect information for any security event before you even delve into the details. It's a vast product with an active roadmap, so I'm satisfied with it for now. It's very efficient at data collection and correlation."
"The product’s stability is good."
"The interface could be more user-friendly. It''s a small improvement that they could make if they wanted to."
"When we pass KPIs to the governance department, there's no option to provide rights to the data or dashboard to colleagues. We can use Power BI for this, but it isn't easy or convenient. They should just come up with a way to provide limited role-based access to auditing personnel"
"While I appreciate the UI itself and the vast amount of information available on the platform, I'm finding the overall user experience to be frustrating due to frequent disconnections and the requirement to repeatedly re-authenticate."
"Everyone has their favorites. There is always room for improvement, and everybody will say, "I wish you could do this for me or that for me." It is a personal thing based on how you use the tool. I do not necessarily have those thoughts, and they are probably not really valuable because they are unique to the context of the user, but broadly, where it can continue to improve is by adding more connectors to more systems."
"Sentinel can be used in two ways. With other tools like QRadar, I don't need to run queries. Using Sentinel requires users to learn KQL to run technical queries and check things. If they don't know KQL, they can't fully utilize the solution."
"The data connectors for third-party tools could be improved, as some aren't available in Sentinel. They need to be available in the data connector panel."
"I believe one of the challenges I encountered was the absence of live training sessions, even with the option to pay for them."
"We're satisfied with the comprehensiveness of the security protection. That said, we do have issues sometimes where there have been global outages and we need to raise a ticket with Microsoft."
"The solution is modular, for example you can buy the RSA ePack, which you buy as a module is not part of the conduit solution. They could include it and have it as an all-in-one solution."
"Threat detection could be better."
"When analyzing something, you have to click several times. It requires a lot of effort to find something."
"NetWitness Endpoint's blocking feature does not work properly - if there's a malicious process, it's not possible to kill it via a custom rule unless and until it's flagged as malicious."
"Its price could be improved. It is an expensive product. Its training is also too expensive. It would be great if they can have a better pricing scheme for the training."
"This solution needs an upgrade in reporting. I have heard from RSA that they are working on this, but as of yet it is not available."
"RSA NetWitness Network could improve on integration with non-native application integration."
"I would like to see Security Orchestration and Response Automation (SOAR) integration."
"The integration could be better. Cortex, for example, does not work with iPhone."
"I would like to see Cortex become less dependent on Active Directory and group policies to manage the deployment. Maybe I need to update my understanding of how to deploy it, but that's the way I know how to use it."
"The solution should be made a bit cheaper."
"The dashboard could be better."
"With Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR, managing its setup phase can be a complicated task."
"The dashboard performance could be improved."
"It is been decommissioned by Palo Alto."
"It doesn't offer automatic internet reports out of the box."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
NetWitness XDR is ranked 15th in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 15 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews. NetWitness XDR is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of NetWitness XDR writes "Beneficial single unified dashboard, good native application integration, and high availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". NetWitness XDR is most compared with Darktrace, ExtraHop Reveal(x), CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Fortinet FortiSOAR, Swimlane and IBM Resilient. See our NetWitness XDR vs. Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR report.
See our list of best Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) vendors.
We monitor all Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) 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.
