There are areas for improvement in the customization options. Every quarter, they are developing the platform with new updates based on feedback provided. View full review »

One drawback is that it becomes so easy to use that users may lose the habit of manual checks and balances. As a security person, you should always worry about potential threats. If you have a very useful and easy tool, you might lose the ability to think differently and critically. 

For example, in a group of ten people, if nine think the same way and one thinks differently, you should consider the tenth person's perspective because they might have valuable insights.

Having a great product is not always beneficial because you may become too dependent on it, which can be problematic in the long term. If you lose your critical thinking skills, you might not recognize when something abnormal is happening. 

While the system will notice, systems can have their own challenges and issues. I'm not criticizing the product itself but emphasizing the importance of not being overly dependent on machines. Similar to what we see with Tesla cars, no matter how advanced, there is always a chance things may not work as expected. So, the users need to prepare for that eventuality.

Seceon Open Threat Management Platform has some add-ons that they sell as part of the whole suite, but not individually. If they sold them individually, they could potentially get more business.

View full review »

Certain features, such as DLP, need to be improved as they are superficial and not in-depth. Additionally, the non-core features need to increase in depth.

View full review »

The dashboard has always been an issue. The latest version has taken care of most of the shortfalls.

View full review »

I haven't encountered any major issues with Seceon OTM. The complexity of the activities and logs is expected, and I appreciate the detailed dashboards.

View full review »

The product should improve the triggering rate. 

View full review »

The SOP they provided wasn't great. They offered training over Sherp Virtualization, and the Seceon leadership visited our location to explain everything in detail, but the documentation and training could be better. It isn't as effective as it could be. There's some room for improvement there. 

View full review »

We are at the client’s end, offering services. They don’t know about security rules and benchmarks. We are working on the discovery and remediation but we don’t really have the intelligence that was available while working with other tools.

The automatic session is impossible to play since it needs to touch Redfin for further analysis. No one has breached our clients.

View full review »

It would be better if they offered global coverage. 

View full review »

The product could be improved by including sandboxing capabilities in the next release.

View full review »

In terms of missing features, it's too soon to say as I've only had two weeks with it. That said, one of the things that caught my attention is that a number of processes seem to take up CPUs. It's a huge amount of computational power. It's justified, of course, however, this puts the solution at a level that's too high for a small enterprise to handle.

It would be ideal with the processing was more manageable. Not many customers are willing to have a dedicated server with two CPUs and one TB of memory. The cost of this is huge for a smaller organization. 

View full review »

It is a standalone solution now. They need to make it into a cloud-based subscription model.

It needs more compatibility for co-managed solutions. It can also have more threats and deeper integration with Microsoft.

View full review »

There might be room for improvement in the Seceon Open Threat Management platform. For example, the management console could use some enhancements.

The functionality of the product is not affected, but the management console itself could be improved. Overall, that's the only aspect that comes to mind for potential enhancement.

View full review »