IBM Security QRadar Reviews

The use cases that are widely used across the globe are related to ransomware phishing, lateral movement, et cetera.

The simple user access model, or the user interface, is something that is very helpful.

The initial setup is not too difficult. 

So far, we have found the product to be stable. 

We've found the solution to be scalable.

The IBM support can be better. It's an aspect that needs improvement. 

In future iterations, I'd like to see an advance in office management, the out-of-the-box use cases that are provided. That needs to be part of the requirement.

It's a stable solution. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The solution scales well.

We have 45,000 users on the solution right now. 

We do plan to increase usage soon. 

We've dealt with technical support in the past and it was lacking. 

They have provided dedicated time to us, to work on the issue that we are observing right now.

We did not use a different solution. We chose this due to the fact that it's an industry-accepted solution. The use cases are easy to configure in multiple things that we considered important while taking the solution.

The deployment was easy. It wasn't overly complex.

It took me around six months to do the implementation. 

We handled the deployment with the assistance of a vendor partner. 

I can't speak to the exact pricing. I've never looked at its commercial costs. 

We did consider other options before choosing this product.

We are a preferred partner of IBM.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

I deploy the IBM QRadar for many organizations, and I've been performing analyses for those organizations as well.

These organizations use the tool for monitoring of their environment. It's a basic SIEM product. So we just log each and every data source, perform an analysis, and create rules. We also create advanced use cases to cater the advanced threat(s).

I am unable to pick one, every component is valuable. It is a very good SIEM.

I would like for Yara to be supported by all components. 

I have been working with this product for the last five years.

I think it's a very stable product that provides much more visibility than the other product.

You can scale the architecture of the QRadar easily by adding licenses.

Small to medium-sized organizations would require one to two people for maintenance while man power for large organizations would be determined by the architecture. 

Customer support needs some improvement as there have been a few cases where we were unable to reach them in time.

I didn't find it to be complex. I think IBM QRadar has a more user-friendly GUI that helps your team work easily within it. Deployment for an all in one will take four to five hours but can vary depending on environment size.

Our in-house team assists our customers with deployment. Our customers are the main POC and we are able to deploy into their environment, make necessary integrations, and create the rules.

Licensing can be costly depending on your architecture.

You receive alerts for misconfigurations which allows your administer to easily reconfigure any issues. 

The organizations themselves are able to monitor all of their information regarding their team including what attacks they are facing on a daily bases.

I would rate this an eight out of ten.

We use IBM QRadar for user behavior analytics and incident handling.

The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very stable, easy to get going, and easy to manage. It is also easy to review all incidents.

The only problem is that if you have too many events that occur, then the storage capacity becomes a problem. We would need to increase the storage capacity.

I have been using IBM QRadar for four years.

We have three customers using it and these customers have 100 to 300 users.

Getting support sometimes takes time.

The initial setup was quite straightforward.

We had the complete deployment and it was up and running in half a day.

You can implement it by yourself.

I would recommend IBM QRadar to other people who want to start using it.

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

I use IBM QRadar for user behavior analytics, and mostly incident handling.

The solution is easy to use, manage, and review all incidents.

If you have too many events that occur, then the storage capacity becomes a problem. You need to have more storage.

I have been using IBM QRadar for approximately four years.

The solution is very stable.

We have approximately three customers and the total users that are using it would be approximately 200.

The initial installation was straightforward, we were able to have it running in half a day.

I do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

There are different types of subscriptions available. We were on an annual subscription, but our customers typically choose the two years subscription option.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM QRadar a nine out of ten.

We use this solution both in our company and those of our clients. We are resellers of QRadar. 

Curator is the leader of teams in the market. It's a product with plenty of features and capabilities. It's a very powerful solution.

The usability of interfaces could be improved and the solution could have better correlation services, as well as faster and updated intelligence interfaces.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Technical support has room for improvement.

The initial setup is easy.

Licensing costs are reasonable.

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

This is a solution you use when you have many security products that you want to manage in one monitor, one analytic. We are partners with IBM and provide implementation services to our customers. I'm a solution security architect.

The most valuable feature is that it can analyze event logs, event security, and give a good consult. When you have SIEM, you can easily manage with one single monitor. QRadar can do a lot of analyses of every security product and will let us know what needs to be done to the log. Sometimes we need security orchestration automated response to support the SOC team.

The concern with QRadar is that there are so many features in the dashboard, too many menus that require going to two or three sub-monitors to enter the QRadar. The user interface is good but there are so many features that can be confusing for the administrator. It could be simplified. 

I've been using this solution for a year. 

I think that QRadar is stable, but I've never worked with other solutions in this area and I have nothing to compare it to. It has dedicated machines and offers great performance. 

The scalability is easy but it comes at a high price.

IBM in Indonesia provides great support.

The initial setup is complex if the data set is large. It really depends on that. We provide maintenance services to our clients so that if they have any trouble, we assist with troubleshooting.

SIEM is quite a pricey solution so we only offer it to enterprise companies that can pay the fees. For smaller companies, it's an extremely expensive product. 

I recommend this solution because I think they provide great support from the sales and technical perspective.

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

I use QRadar for cybersecurity defense, operation, and to improve performances.

I like that it's easy to use and the performance is good.

It would be better if it were more stable and more secure. The price for maintenance could be better. It's too high. In the next release, I think they should focus on the price and the operation.

I have been using IBM QRadar for four years.

IBM QRadar is a stable solution, but it could be more stable.

IBM QRadar is a scalable solution. We have about 100 users at the moment.

I remember that I opened ten or 20 cases to receive support from IBM over three years.

The initial setup and deployment are very easy. I think it took us about a month to implement this solution. We have a team of two, one manager and one technical, to deploy, manage, and maintain this solution.

We installed this solution with the help of a consultant.

The price could be better. I bought a subscription for three years. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give IBM QRadar a seven.

Our primary use case is for monitoring global infrastructure.

The feature that I have found most valuable is how it monitors the real network. That is its leading security feature.

In terms of what could be improved, I'd say do nothing, in its current state it does quite okay for now.

The biggest problem was built on top of the QRadar in the executive operations center network. The integration was not using the network security specialist properly, and all the incidents were inferior with QRadar. Its compatibility is not really good

I have been using IBM QRadar for more than five years.

I'm using the latest version of QRadar.

The stability is very good. Its operation is very good.

We have less than five people using it.

For us, as a small security company, it is covering our needs and our growth.

Customer support is good. When an incident gets raised there is a 10 day response.

The initial setup was complex.

We use the vendor for everything. That is the style of the corporation. For these jobs the responsibility and knowledge is on the vendor's side.

Implementation is over time and the maintenance price for QRadar is competitive.

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

Overall, I would of course recommend this product to others because of all its functionalities.