IBM Security QRadar Reviews

The primary use case of this solution is for monitoring an enterprise data center, globally for 12,000 devices.

It has improved the way that the organization functions.

The most valuable feature is the searching capability and real-time operational use.

Some of the cloud apps need improvement.

In the next release, I would like to see improving the stability of some of the add-on applications.

I have been using IBM QRadar for two years.

We are using the current version.

Stability is moderate.

We have 15 people using this solution in our organization. Their positions vary from Network Engineers, Security Engineers, and Security Analysts.

It's very scalable.

Technical support is good.

I would rate them a nine out of ten. Their response time is good.

Previously, I did not use another solution.

The initial setup is complex. It's just the nature of the CM tool.

I think that the price is fair, but we can always say that the price could be cheaper.

Like any complex enterprise CM tool, you have to have a strong support organization. People who are good at understanding Linux operating systems. You also need a strong technical support team in-house.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to develop software, for some device controllers.

The solution is relatively easy to use.

The product helps increase development speed.

The customization is very good, as are the dashboards and the security.

I'm not sure if there are any features missing from the solution. It's pretty complete.

The pricing of the solution is a bit high. If they could lower it, that would be ideal.

I've been using the solution for three years or so at this point. It hasn't been too long.

The solution is quite stable. It doesn't have bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash on me or freeze. It's reliable.

I only really use the solution myself. I can't speak to the scalability of the solution.

I've never had to reach out to technical support. I can't speak to their responsiveness or knowledgeability.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It's pretty straightforward and simple. We didn't face any real issues during the deployment process.

The price can be expensive, however, it's all relative, as it helps speed up development, which can save money for the organization. 

The payments for the product are made on a yearly basis.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. I'm the only user and I use the desktop version of the solution. I'm basically using it because it's here and I have access to it.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations, however, if it is right for them depends on their need.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the product at an eight. We've mostly been pretty satisfied with it.

We have a lot of use cases with IBM QRadar, but our primary use is for monitoring traffic and detecting tricks.

In terms of how IBM QRadar has improved our company, on peak days it helps us monitor and generate statistics that help to illustrate what is going on in the company. For example, SMB detects ransomware and invalid log-on. If a user is located in the United States, or we expect a login in Russia, or Ukraine, or Kenya, it is very important for us because we can detect what application they are using there, or if a hacker is trying to log in by mobile or another device.

I have found its network traffic log, network bit log, and QBI most valuable.

We have a lot of domain controllers in QRadar tracking all the security. It is also useful for identity management.

In terms of where it could be improved, this includes its forensics, incident response, and security operation center features. Additionally, some also struggle with the rules. We need more features in order to create rules to detect or to meet some requirements for other areas, such as catching the event from other authentication tools, like in Okta, for example.

In some cases, I have issues because some tools are not integrated in QRadar, such as other tools similar to DLP (Data Loss Prevention). We need to create all the integrations manually because they are not integrated in QRadar. We have a problem, for example, because they have Symantec DLP integrated in QRadar, however, it is not working because it's not detected automatically. It is not converting all the columns, but we do have the option to create manually. This is not difficult because it's very clear in the procedures.

I have been using IBM QRadar for seven years.

QRadar's stability is great because it is always live and is always catching and monitoring all the information that we need. When we need information, it is here in QRadar. 

In terms of maintenance of QRadar, my internet is secured by IBM.

For me, the scalability is good.

At the moment, we have no more than 15 people working on QRadar. This includes analysts, forensics, internet response, and active directory.

Tech support is good. Additionally, I can find all the information at IBM.

In some cases, the system or the hardware do not meet the requirements to install one flow collector. Or the menu is not displayed. The menu has 10 options. If the CPU and memory are not enough, the menu shows only five or six options. But this information is not mentioned in the installation process. But it is not complex because the installation is very clear as long as we are meeting all the requirements for the CPU, memory, or the space.

The solution takes maybe four months because we have a lot of integrations.

I would absolutely recommend QRadar because it has a lot of options to improve or detect some information.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give QRadar a 10.

We are using it from the compliance perspective. We need this solution to comply with HIPAA and PCI because our clients require HIPAA and PCI DSS compliance. We also use it for log management, primarily security logs, and to some extent, for operational activities, even though this tool is actually not meant for operational tasks. We do keep track of errors in our appliances like hardware, storage, and network switches through QRadar.

The main or core solution is on-premises. There is an extended arm, which is in the cloud as well for cloud integration.

Security incident and event management are actually the core functionalities of this solution. We receive security logs on this product and based on the received logs, we can create offense tickets that are forwarded to Netcool, which is another solution that we have. I don't have experience with that, but our integration is there so that any offense or security event is forwarded to Netcool, and a ticket is automatically generated in ServiceNow for that offense. This level of automation that we have for security-related events is done through this solution. There's no manual work involved, which obviously takes away a lot of load from the individuals who are managing the security side of it.

It is a pretty solid product for the type that it is representing i.e. SIEM. It can do automatic correlation based on the traffic that you are receiving to some extent. It has plethora of options available for third party application integration. For e.g CISCO Firepower, Palo Alto Dashboard for CISCO and Palo Alto Firewall respectively. Integration with Cloud based Log Sources is also supported via. parsers that support API Connect. This is helpful when pulling in Logs from AWS, Azure, GCP or other Cloud Based Solution like Carbon Black, Imperva etc.

A lot of information that we receive for the devices is IP-based, but it would help if we could have a default dashboard in which we can add more details about the assets for which we are receiving the information. For example, if it is a Windows or Linux device, we only get the IP for that particular device. We don't really get the name and other details of that particular device. For that, you have to drill down into your own asset management system. It would be good to have a place where we can probably add this information so that we don't have to look into other tools.

I have been using this solution for about six months.

It is very stable. As long as you have the proper connectivity availability, it is pretty stable.

Our deployment covers North America, South America and part of Europe. The product is easy to deploy and scale. Almost everyone in our organization is using this solution because most of our projects rely on this. Because of the compliance requirement, most of our projects have to be integrated with QRadar. Each business unit or each program that we have in another environment has independent access to the solutions. They might not be the end users, of course, but at least every admin team of every program unit has access to this tool so that they can see what's happening in their environment.

It also supports multi-tenancy. So, if you have multiple clients or multiple tenants in your environment, you can create logical containers for them. From a logical point of view, you can create separate disconnected containers for each client so that they can only see their data.

Their technical support is quite good. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Yes, we switched over from NNT to QRardar. This product is more detailed. Expensive but definitely more detailed! :)

It was pretty straightforward. These are hardware appliances. So, you need to rack and stack them. If the rack space, cabling, and other things are already done, which would typically be the responsibility of a data center team, it essentially takes three to five days. But this is only the core deployment. The fine tuning on top of it would take extra time based on the environment and how complex it is.

It was implemented by team that included me. We have an external team for its maintenance.

The IBM QRadar Licensing for the core Events(EPS) and Flows(FPS) is per second based. The licensing is perpetual and surely expensive but the output of the Product makes it worth your money. 

I would absolutely recommend this solution. I am pretty okay with it, and I don't have any issues with it. It has some competitors like Splunk and LogRhythm. Symantec has its own SIEM solution. ArcSight, LogRhythm, and Splunk are in the first quadrant for the Gartner research. They are leaders in their products, and they know what they're doing. It also comes down to what your company is into, how does it fit into a particular environment, and how compatible it is with a particular environment. I could have gone on the Splunk path and probably said the same thing for it as well. 

I would rate IBM QRadar a nine out of ten. It is a pretty solid product.

We use the solution for a variety of tasks. We use it, for example, for authentication, network-related authentication, user-related tasks, and Windows UNIX servers. It's a lot. There's a ton of use cases. I really can't sync right now about every single use case, however, the main things are authentication and network-related systems and all flavors of UNIX Windows. 

It helped our organization in the sense that having it was better than nothing. However, I did not enjoy the product overall and I advised we switch to something else.

The user behavior analytics as part of our deployment was okay, even though it was clunky.

The solution can scale.

I really didn't like QRadar to be honest. I inherited it. I was part of the reason that we moved over to LogRhythm. The solution just isn't user friendly.

The solution is clunky. 

The interface could be much better.

The integration capabilities within the product are not that great.

I've been using the solution for about two years at this point. My team has been using it for two to three years, so we have a total of about five years of experience in all.

I wouldn't describe the solution as stable. 

It was really buggy. Like other app integrations, it wasn't straightforward. It was pretty clunky. We tried to integrate Qualys with it and it wasn't effective. To integrate anything took quite a bit of time and energy. It wasn't easy. When it did, it didn't work properly. It wasn't really pulling in the data correctly.

Scalability was hard as it was on-prem. We needed to add more modules, and had to add more of the servers to stack it. It wasn't that a simple task at all. I wouldn't say that it scales well, although technically, you can scale it.

When we were using the solution, we had ten to 15 users on it. They were anyone from Information Security Engineers to regular IT admins.

Technical support was awful. We often didn't even have any assistance available to us. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate them at a three. We were very unsatisfied with the level of support we received. They just simply weren't helpful when it came down to it.

The organization didn't previously use a different solution before choosing QRadar.

We actually switched to LogRhythm as I didn't like how the solution was working for the organization.

I didn't handle the initial setup. It was handled before I arrived at the organization.

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using.

I wouldn't recommend the solution. I'd probably tell others to shy away and look at other products like possibly Splunk, however, it's a pricey option. LogRhythm is pretty good. We're having some issues with it. That said, for the most part, it's okay. 

Exabeam also seems like it might be a good option. I haven't worked with it personally, however, I've had some experience with a POC.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a three out of ten. We didn't have a good experience with it. If it offered, for example, easier behavior analytics, easier integrations, better interface, supported model integration, and a good user interface to perform analysis I might rate it higher. Basically, it just needs to be much more user-friendly.

This is a security monitoring product and the primary use case is to detect strange behavior by users. For example, if we have a user that has not used the service for a long time and then all of a sudden, somebody logs in one night. This is not normal and the system will detect it. This is just one example of many use cases.

Integration is very easy and the reporting is good.

This is a good product, although it does require some fine-tuning.

The dashboard is pathetic and it takes a long time to perform a search.

The graphics need to be improved.

Providing good support is something that they need to work on.

It would be helpful if IBM published more use cases.

We have been using QRadar UBA since 2016.

The issue that I have with technical support is related to their large pool of resources. If you are lucky then you get good support, but sometimes you get pathetic support. Suppose you open a ticket, there are times where it will be very good, but the quality is intermittent.

I have experience working with Splunk and I find that the searching capabilities are better with it. Also, the processing time in Splunk is better. With QRadar UBA, when you have three, four, or five rules together, it takes more time to respond.

The complexity and length of time required for the initial setup depend on the requirements. There are some out-of-the-box features that can be implemented right away, but some equipment is not supported directly, so you need to write a DSM (device support module).

Implementing a DSM takes some time, although it will depend on the log source. If the log source is fully compatible then it will be very quick. However, if it is not compatible then you will need to do some scripting and other work.

The price of this product is high.

QRadar is not perfect. It's a good security monitoring product that can provide threat intelligence, but it cannot do it alone. You need to integrate with many other things, such as IBM Orchestrator. Also, you need to have X-Force. After these kinds of things are integrated, it works a little bit better.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Our primary use case with IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is seeing if there are log-ins from the same ID's but from different locations, this is one use case. Or if MAC addresses keep changing, this is another use case. Lastly, if the risk level is high, like with different IP's. These are the three use cases we have.

I really like the feature we have with the logs, that if there are any credit card numbers  being used, like a PII, you can just use rejects and you can mask it. This is a really good feature in QRadar.

In terms of what could be improved, it would be easier if you didn't have to long escape for a bar sync. If you have to, the logs are not automatically barred, so you have to guide the whole atmosphere.

Additionally, there should be integration with IBM Guardian. 

Lastly, there should be an extension where we can get the reports. This could be an extension to the dashboard with the Guardian or another product with limited technology, for example IPS. Now, we only have IBM. Basically, it needs more and more integration models.

I have been using IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics for a month or two.

In terms of stability, in my current company, QRadar is working fine. But in my previous organization that was using QRadar, we experienced some QRadar failures. There were two or three times the data was wiped out instead of transferring to EGA and we had to restart QRadar from scratch and all the data was lost. It happened a lot. Maybe it was due to lack of management since it was a new company.

We do have experience with support. We get support from the IBM people in Karachi, Pakistan.

They're good.

The initial setup was really easy, it was really straightforward. I got it done in one day.

What advice would I give? I want the certification to be very honest. I typically like the hands-on with QRadar, they're quite different.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics a seven.

I have used other solutions, like LogRhythm, for a few use cases like ransomware detection, etc.. and there were less false positives there. With the ransomware especially, it was very thin there. We actually have very few use cases and there were lots of false positives with QRradar. If I compare the AI function and the logarithms I think it needs some improvement. 

It is a complex product compared to LogRhythm.

We use IBM QRadar for monitoring user behavior in order to baseline the user activity. Then we print use cases around those behaviors to see if anything stands out. We can then see if something is going wrong in the enrollment from a user activity point of view.

In terms of valuable features, QRadar shows very effective correlations. If you combine all the logins plus user behavior and the current intelligence, it give a very good correlation for business. I think it reduces the false positives in user activity monitoring because we have a lot of social information to correlate with other data.

From a functionality point of view, there are issues sometimes. There is a component in QRadar where all these certifications need to be installed, like a UPN. Sometimes we experience functionality issues where the logging, indexing, and searching were not working. I have personally seen it misbehaving. Sometimes we need to restart it. In some cases when it was malfunctioning we needed to contact support to resolve the issue. I don't see any issues in the integration model with a UPN from a usability point of view, but with functionally you can experience a lot of issues.

I have been working with IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics for two years.

I have not seen any issues with the stability of the solution either.

I have not seen any issues with the scalability of the solution

The technical support is fine now. I was not happy with the support when we started with this solution in 2017. If you look at that first year, 2017 to 2018, they had lots of support issues. We logged the cases and they would only call us back depending on their resources. There were no options to call them on a landline or a hotline number. They needed improvement there. They should have had a dedicated support response. Over the last year I have seen an improvement. I used to wait for a week to get a call back from them, but now, when you have critical tickets they will respond in two or three hours, depending on the criticality of your support case. They have improved.

The initial setup was neither straightforward nor too complex. It did take some effort to implement, but it was manageable. We did not see any issues implementing it. We actually completed it in three to six months. When we initially implemented it we used some fresh use cases and observed the performance but these were all completed in three to six months. The initial deployment took hardly one week.

Regarding the price, it is a bit high for normal customers. It is better for enterprise-class customers where they get a licensing model for MSSP for enterprises.

We are a service provider company, so our recommendations depend on the customer's preference. The best we can do is propose the solution based on support, pricing, and their requirements.

Our customers are satisfied with the product and they are not looking for anything else. I would recommend the product.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics a seven.