We performed a comparison between Seceon Open Threat Management Platform and Securonix Next-Gen SIEM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The main thing is the value proposition. It is one of the most sophisticated yet affordable solutions that I've come across. It is also one of the easiest-to-manage yet comprehensive solutions for a SOC analyst. Its customizations are really good, and it has a lot of integrations. It is multi-tenant and very fast to onboard. Its stability is 100%. We've never had an outage with it. It doesn't require extensive hardware resources. Its level of support is also very good. They have a very responsive technical team."
"The algorithm used in Seceon OTM is clear and logical, categorizing events as needed. This helps us identify and respond to threats effectively."
"We only recently started using Seceon, so we aren't taking advantage of all its features yet. We have enabled some proactive alerts about utilization and bottlenecks from high traffic."
"You can use different solutions in a single platform which is very easy and attractive for customers."
"The solution is stable."
"I like that it's an AI-based platform. The most valuable feature is that it's a comprehensive solution. Most tools in the marketplace are comprised of miscellaneous items. They fail to provide real-time remediation features. However, with Seceon Open Threat Management Platform, anything you can think of in cybersecurity, like auto-remediation, real-time response, and even on-premise components, is available in a single platform. So, it's perfect for finance and healthcare who don't want to share their data with a third party like the cloud. You can have this on-premise as well. So, the expenditure will be lower as less human intervention is required."
"The most valuable features are behaviour analytics, threat intelligence, endpoint detection, and response features."
"The solution is very cost-effective compared to Splunk and LogRhythm."
"I rate the technical support a nine out of ten. They're friendly. Whenever we have a P1 issue, we write an email and our issue is resolved in one or two hours."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is their analytics platform where they have the open security data-link, which they introduced. This is typically different from the other vendors."
"The detection of threats and reduction of false positive alarms as compared to other solutions are valuable features. It has improved threat detection response and reduced a lot of noise from false positives as compared to our previous SIEM solutions."
"The most valuable feature is what Securonix calls enrichment. Securonix is very powerful because of all the data it can process and automatically enrich. The actionable intelligence it provides is one of its benefits, due to the processing capacity it has."
"I was looking for software as a service rather than having issues with managing hardware, upgrades, updates. I was trying to step away from that. Those were the key factors when looking at Securonix as a full-feature SIEM with next-generation capabilities available."
"The second feature is that within the SNYPR product there is a functionality called Spotter. We use that for link analysis diagrams and to run the stats command. That's extremely useful because it replaces a tedious, manual process we used to use, using Microsoft Excel and a couple of other methods, to bring data together."
"The big data security analytics platform, structured and unstructured data analytics, and user and entity behavior analytics provided by the product are probably the best in the industry."
"The customizability of the tool is valuable. We are able to customize the use cases and create them easily without a large amount of Securonix assistance. It's very flexible. We do not have to rely on Professional Services to modify or create a new use case."
"The product should improve the triggering rate."
"For future releases, integrating incident response tools and improving communication on incident reporting could be beneficial."
"The product could be improved by including sandboxing capabilities in the next release."
"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."
"It would be better if they offered global coverage."
"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. Human working is also very essential for the solution. The automatic session is impossible to play since it needs to touch Redfin for further analysis. No one has breached our clients."
"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."
"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."
"Securonix could open up information regarding the indicators of compromise or cyber-threat intelligence database that they use. The idea is that they share what threats they are detecting."
"When they did upgrades or applied patches, sometimes, there was downtime, which required the backfill of data. There were times when we had to reach out and get a lot of things validated."
"The incident response area should be improved."
"We would like to see better integration with other products."
"It seems to me that within Securonix there is no option for completely visualizing the types of sources or if there is any loss of logs. I've heard that they have an additional module to validate those types of cases, but in terms of the platform itself only, I can only see how often it sends data but not any specific detail."
"Securonix implements risk scores based on different policies that are triggered. We've seen some challenges with the risk scores and how they trigger. These are things that Securonix has recognized and they've been working with us to help improve things."
"The technical support of the solution is an area with shortcomings and needs improvement."
"Other than issues with the training, there have been issues with the encryption. There have also been issues with some of the reporting, minor glitches that they have fixed as they've gone along."
More Seceon Open Threat Management Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is ranked 21st in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 10 reviews while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is ranked 7th in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 27 reviews. Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is rated 8.4, while Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Seceon Open Threat Management Platform writes "Has the ability to categorize alerts and reporting dashboards are useful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Securonix Next-Gen SIEM writes "Spotter tool has helped us eliminate many hours required to manually create link analysis diagrams". Seceon Open Threat Management Platform is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Fortinet FortiSIEM, Splunk Enterprise Security, ManageEngine Log360 and Microsoft Sentinel, whereas Securonix Next-Gen SIEM is most compared with IBM Security QRadar, Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Gurucul UEBA. See our Seceon Open Threat Management Platform vs. Securonix Next-Gen SIEM report.
See our list of best Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) vendors.
We monitor all Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) 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.