We performed a comparison between OpenText EnCase eDiscovery and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Google, Commvault, Microsoft and others in eDiscovery."It indexes much faster, and is more reflexive because of the Enscripts."
"The technical support is excellent."
"The most important feature we've found is the Enscripts. That is one powerful feature that I, personally, love to use."
"It speeds up the process, so I can meet my deadlines."
"Data Recovery: Its ability to repair damaged partitions and uncover hidden partitions from within the tool, and allow further analysis."
"The solution is very stable."
"I like the processing feature on the product because it does everything at once, i.e, indexing, recovery, keyword searches, etc."
"The drag-and-drop interface enables analysts with no programming knowledge to create playbooks easily."
"For organizations that are stable with their security operations, like those with around 50 members in their security team running full-phased operations 24/7, Cortex is necessary."
"From the security team's standpoint, the solution has improved our organization's overall cybersecurity."
"The product can automate security tasks."
"I have no complaints about Cortex's stability."
"The most valuable features are the orchestration because of the way in which it coordinates the loss from all the devices and it provides us with a high-level overview of the critical log information."
"The most valuable feature is automation."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Sometimes the application can take more time to complete the image processing or fail at the end of the process."
"I would like to see a capability to ingest and absorb more data. That would be really good. It currently is lacking this function."
"Ease of use and learning curve need improvement."
"The reporting is a bit unreliable. It needs to be better."
"In the past, incident response time for tech support was slow."
"We have come across problems with the end-case. We could not find an email discovery type of module and there was not flexibility with the email."
"There were minor UI bugs."
"Implementing this solution requires a lot of involvement from the vendor and it should be made easier for the partners."
"The price of the solution could be improved."
"XSOAR could have more integration options."
"Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR could improve the Panorama feature. We had to turn it off because it was not working properly."
"I would like to see Cortex become less dependent on Active Directory and group policies to manage the deployment. Maybe I need to update my understanding of how to deploy it, but that's the way I know how to use it."
"We need a little hands-on experience to install the solution."
"The user interface could be a bit better."
"There should be an on-premise version available for customers to have different choices."
More Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is ranked 6th in eDiscovery with 8 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is ranked 2nd in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) with 42 reviews. OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText EnCase eDiscovery writes "A stable and scalable hybrid solution with easy setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR writes "Enables the investigators to go through the review process a lot quicker". OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is most compared with Nuix eDiscovery, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), whereas Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR is most compared with Cortex XSIAM, Splunk SOAR, Microsoft Sentinel, Fortinet FortiSOAR and Swimlane.
We monitor all eDiscovery reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.