IBM Security QRadar Reviews

We are using IBM QRadar for threat protection and management.

IBM QRadar could improve the plugins and threat detection.

I have been using IBM QRadar for approximately seven years.

The solution is stable.

I have found IBM QRadar to be scalable.

The price of this solution is reasonable.

I rate IBM QRadar a seven out of ten.

We use IBM QRadar to monitor security logs across the network.

One very useful feature is the plug-in offering that allows you to integrate it with other solutions, such as integrating it with plug-ins like ForeScout, Carbon Black, and the rest. Additionally, the ability of the agents to filter using XPath query to filter out the specific events you want to pick from, especially Windows log sources, is also very useful. That goes a long way in managing the EPS of the solution.

There are two ways you can pull logs: one way is where you can receive logs or send logs using the agents and previous transformation and the other way is where QRadar logs onto the servers using the admin account and then pulls the logs itself. The functionality that I would love to see with that remote pulling is to have the ability to also select what logs its pulling because when you use MSRPC now to receive loads from your log surface, it basically pulls all the events from that server. So even the noisy events that would overshoot your EPS, would also be pulled. So for particularly active or high servers that generate a whole lot of security events, let's say like your SFTP server that has a lot of devices on your network connecting to it, if you try to pull the logs remotely it would overshoot your EPS really quickly.

So if they could improve the functionality of the remote pull to also be able to select the logs that it is pulling from the log sources, that would be very, very effective. The reason for the pull is because the agents are not tamper-proof and any administrator can help shut down the service and uninstall the application and a whole lot of other things. Basically, your listening agent is at the mercy of the administrators, and for a security device or security software, that is a big vulnerability, because anybody can then go into the server, stop the agent, and then run any command or make any change they want to do, which would make your monitoring null and void. It would be good if the agent itself could be tamper-proof. And back to the first point, the reason why I prefer the remote pull is if there's no agent on the server and it's the console logging onto the server, your monitoring is much more secure. Regardless of what changes are being made on the server or what's going on the server, if the server is shut down and then a newer version is brought up with the same hostname and IP address, you would not need to go back in and re-install the agent. The console would just automatically connect back to that server once the IP address and the host are back up.

Additionally, I would like the rule creation interface to be much more user-friendly in the next release.

I have been using IBM QRadar every day for the last 12 months.

In terms of stability, it is very stable. In the almost two years in the environment, there has been only one issue. It was a disc failure and that was replaced within a week by the OEM.

Scalability might be an issue, but maybe it's because in our environment we do not use the application host. Since we use on-premise appliances we did notice that performance degraded a little when we added some plugins. So the recommendation was that we should have a separate application server that would host the application and then interface with the plugins and interface with the management console. But we do not have that within our environment so I can't speak to whether that would improve performance.

IBM tech support has been responsive.

I believe the initial setup was straightforward but I was not here for the setup, although I did not get any complaints.

The license is a yearly one.

I would recommend IBM QRadar. The user interface is really great and it simplifies the task of monitoring your environment.

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

We use IBM QRadar for threat protection.

The most valuable features are log monitoring, easy-to-fix issues, and problem-solving.

There is a shortage of skilled individuals with knowledge about the solution. There should be more training programs to teach and enable users get familiar.

I have been using this solution for approximately one year.

The stability of the solution could improve.

We have approximately 20 people using this solution in my organization.

The technical support is great. Additionally, there are plenty of resources available to increase knowledge about the solution.

We have used other solutions in the past.

The installation is not very difficult, I did not have any problems.

We used consultants for the implementation. We have five engineers that do the maintenance of this solution.

There is a license required for this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM QRadar a seven out of ten.

We have a POC environment but have not onboard it to any of our clients.

The most valuable feature is the correlation function, which is flexible.

It is a bit easier to use than other products, such as Splunk or ELK Elasticsearch.

The technical support can be improved a little bit, and the price could be cheaper.

I have been using IMB QRadar for one year.

IBM QRadar is a stable solution.

Technical support needs improvement.

I know a little bit about Splunk and ELK Elasticsearch. We did not have a PoC with Splunk so it was just theoretical, but I did learn about it.

The initial setup is very easy.

IBM QRadar is a little bit expensive compared to other products.

I would recommend this solution to others who are looking for an on-premises solution. For a SIEM solution, it is the best one to go with. If they are interested in using the cloud, I would not recommend it. The cloud version of QRadar is QRoC and it is a bit complicated.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Most valuable features include the granularity of information. Queries provide leads for finding information. We also deal with the Symantec team, which is a different one. 

The solution has definite room for improvement. There were certain bugs we had to deal with. Bigger issues involve the quantity of rules involved in its deployment. Also, false positives can be obtained and there is a need to fine tune the solution once every month or two until everything is correct. 

The stability and product support should also be addressed. 

When an offense occurs, the source IP will automatically provide a source username which is not correct. For reasons I don't understand, it uses the team or the name of the last user of the computer and this is not always accurate. This means that there are times that I obtain offenses that are ascribed to my boss and which serve him. The solution ensures that the host is vulnerable to another attack. The solution will estimate that the targeted host is vulnerable to certain attacks. 

Moreover, the solution may provide information of attacks that failed or that are irrelevant, such as vulnerabilities involving modems in which the target host is the Windows Server. This begs the question of why an offense that was and will always be blocked must be generated, such as that involving vulnerability from a modem. 

I have been using IBM QRadar for five years. 

When it comes to the scalability of the solution, it is possible to install many apps on top of IBM QRadar which can provide a host of views, such as those involving user behavior and analytics. There is no need to construct an SQL report, for example, as there are many free apps available which can be used to extend one's IBM QRadar functionalities. 

:
IBM technical support is always terrible. I have much experience with IBM, dating back 25 years in IT. I worked with IBM as a partner for almost 10 years. The organization is so big that it cannot tell one person from another. One can send an email and then get transferred from one support person to another, needing with the need to reiterate the issue anew with each one. In France they go on vacation and there is no one to whom one can address his issue. They also have problems with directing and redirecting phone calls. 

I found myself in charge of all hardware issues involving IBM. Whenever we had a case with IBM which was escalated, I managed to resolve the issue before them. I would find a solution while they would still be making queries about some version. Sometimes I feel they are buying time. At other times, they start by enquiring about what I did in an attempt to resolve the issue. There are times that they insist on the purchase of a subscription as a condition of benefiting from high level support and at these moments I'm inclined to tell them that they should be paying me for this. 

The initial setup is quite straitforward and not so difficult. 

The pricing is always fine. 

We use the solution with multiple customers on a daily basis. We have experience with its installation, configuration and use. 

I rate IBM QRadar as a six or seven out of ten. 

We use the solution for network behavior and log analytics. We wish to procure one for behavior analytics.

I am not certain which version we are using. 

There is a need for a behavior analytics solution in the environment. We use the solution to highlight unusual traffic for a single particular link or even single particular user traffic. 

The solution will not provide alerts in the event of any particular traffic. It will only alert in the case of a security threat. 

I am looking for a solution to replace IBM QRadar. We use it for incident reporting, but I need one for behavior analytics. I need one which will send alerts in the event of any behavior. 

The solution is fine for analyzing logs. We already have basic modules. We require more modules for getting so that we may obtain further details. We essentially use IBM QRadar for analyzing particular logs. 

There are no additional features which should be added or upgraded in the next release. 

The solution is reliable. 

The scalability is fine. 

Technical support is okay. We have had no issues with them. 

The license is not subscription-based. We have been doing the same deployment for more than ten years. 

The pricing is alright. 

Our environment is binding. We have only monitoring and data central traffic.

I would recommend the solution to others. It is fine for analyzing logs. 

We use this solution for advanced threat detection, insider threat monitoring, risk and vulnerability management, and unauthorized traffic detection regarding our network. We can monitor and detect web attacks with it as well. 

Within our organization, there are roughly 2,000 to 3,000 employees using this solution. As of now, we don't have any plans to increase our usage of IBM QRadar.

The basic use case of this solution is to identify insider threats. Insider threats are the most dangerous kind of threat for any type of organization to secure. This solution identifies who the insider threats are, and also determines if there are any malicious activities taking place inside of an organization itself. In short, it provides us with real-time visibility so we can identify who the insider threats and what malicious activities are occurring inside of our own network. It also protects our web applications from DNS attacks.

The threat hunting capabilities in general are great. 

I was going to say that the reporting could be improved, but IBM recently introduced a new cloud-based security service that integrates with QRadar. Now, reporting is much easier than before. I personally can't think of an area for improvement.

I have been using this solution for two and a half years. 

This solution is quite stable. 

We receive 24/7 support via email; however, we don't have to contact support often because we have our own trained team. They handle most issues.

We used to use Splunk.

How complex the initial setup is completely depends on the customer's infrastructure. If there are lots of tools that need to be integrated, then the setup is going to be really complex. I wouldn't say that the initial setup is complex, it's more moderate than anything. 

Deployment took two to three weeks from beginning to end.

The price of this solution is a little high.

Before implementing a new solution, you need to understand your network infrastructure completely. You need to determine if third-party integration is supported or not. IBM Qradar supports a lot of third-party integration because third-party tool integration is often required. 

Storage also needs to be defined properly as logs need to be kept for a certain amount of time. If you have to store logs for three to six months, then you'll need to ensure that you've evaluated the storage capacity properly.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. We're very satisfied with it. 

We are a service provider and we are providing the solution as a managed service for multitenancy security.

The solution is flexible and easy to use.

IBM is going through some problems with its resources currently making its support response time slow.

I have been using the solution for a couple of months.

I find the solution reliable. 

The solution is scalable. We have 15 customers using it at the moment.

The support could be a lot better by being faster.

We recently switched to this solution from LogRhythm cloud. One of the main reasons we switched solutions was because it is more scalable.

The installation was a little difficult and could be made easier.

We have evaluated Secureonix and this solution is far superior. We did the implementation of Securonix for two customers and we canceled it. We rolled back those clients onto this solution because Securonix failed on both implementations.

I would recommend this solution to others. We have invested in it and we plan on using it in the future.

I rate IBM QRadar an eight out of ten.