Torq Reviews

We utilize Torq as our central hyperautomation hub to bridge the gap between detection and remediation. Our primary use case involves ingesting alerts from our SIEM and Cloud Detection & Response (CDR) tools via webhooks. Once an alert is received, Torq triggers automated end-user interviews using HyperAgents to validate the activity. If confirmed, the system automatically generates Jira tickets for tracking. Beyond basic alerting, we use Torq to correlate high-fidelity threat intelligence from CrowdStrike and AWS GuardDuty, and to automate critical IT workflows such as user deprovisioning and group management.

We have used Torq to automate triage, investigation, and remediation actions across multiple attack surfaces including endpoint security, identity, and cloud. The initial deployment of Torq was straightforward.

Torq's Agentic AI has increased alert handling capability and capacity for our SecOps staff. Torq's unified platform approach to AI, SOAR, automation, and case management is superior compared to my experience managing multiple point solutions. Torq has changed the day-to-day experience for our security team.

There are areas where Torq could improve, and the solution does have some downsides that could be addressed.

I have been using Torq for approximately three years.

Torq has maintained good stability. I have not experienced lagging, crashing, or downtime with the solution.

Torq's support team is responsive with a speed rating of seven out of ten. The quality of their answers is satisfactory.

I have used alternatives to Torq.

I would rate my overall experience with Torq as a eight out of ten.

Initially, we were using Slack for small automations, such as creating pipelines or shutting down servers. For example, I could shut down one of our Angular services on one of our servers through a slash command in Slack. To automate this process, we migrated everything from Slack to Torq. Currently, we are in the migration phase, with most of it completed, though some portions are still pending.

We use Torq for identity management. For identity purposes, we create user accounts and have a workflow that creates a user account, adds that user into Slack, and grants Git access. This workflow handles user additions, deletions, and modifications related to identity, and it is working very well.

We are not using Torq extensively for security purposes, as we have limited use cases for security. However, we are using it for day-to-day activities and general automations, which are also working well.

Feature-wise, I appreciate the Torq UI because of its drag-and-drop functionality. Everything is drag-and-drop, and I can accomplish whatever I want to do directly without writing any code. In Slack, there are many things that require writing code and familiarity with automation tools, but Torq is no-code. This is very good compared to all other solutions I have seen.

The workload has been reduced quite a bit. Initially, onboarding a new user would take four or five hours for one person to create a user account everywhere, remember everything, and follow Confluence documentation. After implementing Torq, we only need to provide the name, user ID, and email, submit it, and then it creates everything. Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes. This represents a very good time saving.

I do not dislike anything about Torq because it has satisfied all of our use cases and requirements. We contacted support as well, and support is very good. I believe everything is good now. However, one thing I can mention is that if Torq provided more templates on the development side, that would be beneficial.

As of now, Torq satisfies our use cases. A template would be helpful for someone who does not know anything about Torq and is starting to use it for the first time. After conducting a POC on Torq, I can implement solutions without needing templates as much, but templates would serve as a reference for new users. For example, templates would show what is possible with Torq. We faced this issue when we were new to Torq. We were considering use cases but wondering whether they were possible with Torq. At that time, we asked support if it was possible, and they explained how to implement it. If there were default templates available, we could see the templates and understand what is possible and doable with Torq.

I have used Torq for about one and a half year.

I have not faced any issues until now. Torq is working very well without any problems and no downtime. Whenever I access the Torq URL, it is working. This is very good.

There is no downtime at all. We have been using Torq for one and a half years, but we have experienced no downtime.

Torq is very scalable. Whenever we require any new use cases, we simply need to create a new workflow. If we need to update something, we can update the workflow as well. Torq is fully scalable.

The support team is very quick. Within 24 hours, they will send an email or come on a call if something is critical. Support is provided within 24 hours.

We used Slack previously. I do not have experience with other tools. We used only Slack. However, Slack is used primarily for chatting and communication purposes in all organizations. While Slack is not similar to Torq, we were able to accomplish our automation through it somehow.

The initial deployment was very easy. I did not face any issues. We purchased a SaaS product that is cloud-based, so there were no issues at all. The process was very straightforward with simple steps.

At least one or two people are needed. One to two people are enough for this. It is a one-time setup where we create workflows based on our use cases. However, if we want to add more workflows, we need some support. For that purpose, one or two people who know Torq are more than enough.

After we created a workflow and tested it, we started using it, and the return was immediate. After creating the workflow, we were immediately getting results.

The pricing is cheap. Although I did not purchase the product myself, my manager and others were discussing it. This is a very cheap product, and it is very helpful.

I have been working for five years with experience in the IT field. Torq is very good. It manages everything. I would rate this product 10 out of 10.

For Torq, first of all, it's a hyperautomation and AI assistant usage. Our EDR SentinelOne is integrated in Torq and besides the vendor itself having hyperautomation abilities, Torq helps me to analyze incidents and to respond to incidents more quickly and more efficiently.

Torq's AI SOC automation case management is much faster and more efficient compared to the manual tools I have used before. Torq is an ideal assistant for AI SOC in automation challenges.

Torq changed the day-to-day experience for my security analysts. They are more confident and can test more approaches in the security operation center every day as workflows and routine.

I rely on Torq's AI assistant in most of my incident response and in building right and less complex workflows for automation.

Torq helped me also in some infrastructure and ticketing challenges, for example, to organize the ticketing system in our company, but I am still in a process of learning about Torq and realizing different scenarios using Torq.

The most valuable feature of Torq is hyperautomation and AI assistant because the quality of speed and recommendation from the AI assistant is really high. Another outstanding feature is that you don't need to write code. There is a library of prepared scripts or JSON scripts which can be right and adapted. You can face quite complex challenges without a programming background and can successfully solve these issues and challenges.

Torq's no-code library helps me to be more efficient and respond to incidents more flexibly. The support of the AI assistant makes my actions more efficient and quicker.

The only thing is more out-of-the-box integrations. Torq already has a lot of supported integrations and adding new ones is not difficult, but for some customers, it's easier to have a plug and play interface to start onboarding.

We didn't evaluate other options because we tested Torq and we liked it.

At this stage, I have no additional suggestions. I will update my review several months later and maybe then I will have some suggestions to prove and to what in addition I would like to see in the solution.

I can't evaluate Torq's agentic AI, but I think in my next review, I can provide more information.

I have been using Torq for the last six months.

I haven't experienced any downtime or technical issues while running the platform.

Torq can handle growth and increase easily without any downtime or lack of service.

Customer support is responsive and helpful, but most of my questions were more how-to questions.

I used online SIEMs with integrated SOARs, not online but on-premises, and we switched because it was too slow and too inefficient to use.

From my point of view, Torq has excellent documentation and a support portal. You can find literally everything on the support portal. There are visual manuals and quite simple instructions for onboarding and for every use case you can imagine in your infrastructure.

My advice would be to test Torq in your environment, ask as many questions as possible during POC and refer to documentation in cases you feel not confident about your new solution.

At this stage, we are just customers of Torq.

Regarding Torq's pricing and license costs, as long as our existing team started to work more efficiently and quicker, I think we have quite a return of investment and we suppose to add more security management center tools. The return of investment is also the money we saved not adding another security tool. For me and for our security stack, it's about 30% return on investment.

Torq is a standalone solution from Torq providers.

We didn't evaluate other options because we tested Torq and we liked it.

I think I have told everything about Torq that I can share at this stage, but I am still in the process of learning the platform and I still think that there are many more features which can be adapted and can be used inside the company.

According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient. From Torq workflows, I learn much more about my company ecosystem. This also reflects on the defensive side of the company. I see the gaps that I had according to incidents and I can fix and address the gaps relying on knowledge I get from automation results.

I think the speed of work increased minimum by 50%, but I think with more automation and more optimization, we can make this result much better.

The easiness of integration, good quality of support and good quality of documentation make this product easy to work with. From what I see, the vendor itself is oriented on improvement, which means that they will not stop at the level they reached by now.

I am quite confident in Torq because I have checked, for example, compliance to ISO 27001 and this is the most relevant standard here in Georgia. I trust in Torq and I trust in the security compliance the platform provides.

Torq's AI recommendations are consistently helpful. There was no case when the system provided me with a false recommendation or inaccurate response.

Alert fatigue is something I would like Torq to help me address.

My overall rating for this review is 10.

My main use case for Torq is to handle the correct cases using it as a SOAR platform. We have created a work plan and we've used Torq as a SOAR platform to handle the incidents from start to closure.

In my opinion, the best features Torq offers are ease of navigation and good AI usage as Socrates. There are different stages of the incident when it comes into the queue, and we could easily navigate to the sections that we would want to update and work on. That is how it brings a lot of customization to the incidents navigation and all other stages of the incident. The good usage of AI is regarding Socrates, the AI that summarizes and can respond to the threats or the incidents on its own when it's assigned to the incident. Those are two of the strongest points of Torq.

Torq is good in the reporting structure and showing metrics to the leadership. I think Torq plays a good role in that sense.

Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification. In terms of auto closure of incidents, it can do better when it uses ML. I choose that number because it's a great SOAR tool. It's not one of those existing SOAR platforms or just a pure SOAR. It has good incident handling, good UI, and a good user-friendly environment, but it can also improve its automation workbooks, work plans, and usage of ML to better cater to the market or consumers.

I have used Torq for five months.

I did not see it buffer, take a lot of time to load, or be unresponsive. I haven't seen those issues in Torq. I think that's a good experience.

If scalability is rated out of ten, I would rate it seven out of ten.

It was Demisto XSOAR, and we shifted because we needed a more user-friendly SOAR platform.

I would just make sure to replace the old or the previous solution with Torq point by point. If that is good, I think everything else will be taken care of.

We were just consumers.

I can share the time saved from my work alone and cannot disclose or specify any other employees. I saved nearly roughly about ten hours of my time while I was working in Torq because it's much better than the previous tool.

I have heard Hyper Automate is pretty user-friendly and has less coding compared to other leaders in the market or other players in the market. Its drag and drop tasks or work plan building is what I heard.

We have seen fewer failures of automations from the time Torq came into the picture. We've had a more streamlined process of handling incidents, and at the same time, we've learned to embed the AI into our incident types, and that is how it has helped us in the automation. I think Torq can really integrate other tools within the case management platform, and it can make the work a little more efficient. I would rate this review eight out of ten.