No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Security Hub vs Logpoint comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Torq
Sponsored
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
AWS Security Hub
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (8th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (20th)
Logpoint
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (33rd), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (29th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (14th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (39th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (20th)
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Solutions Architect at ProArch
Automation has streamlined multi-tenant SOC workflows and improves alert handling efficiency
Although the reporting within Torq is not that great, we did ask for many features regarding reporting in Torq, but due to some platform constraints, they could not make the whole dataset available for us to be used in reporting. Except for that, we used some basic reporting. When I used Torq, it was indeed in the early stages of AI capabilities. Only a few customers were allowed to use it, and we were among them. It functioned well as long as we summarized the data properly. If you input garbage, you would get garbage out. Thus, we had to do significant fine-tuning regarding what data context we provided to the AI orchestrator to get meaningful results. In terms of Torq's unified platform approach to AI SOC automation and case management compared to managing multiple point solutions across my security stack, I find it case-centric. The unified view in case management is good since it provides clarity, although there are limitations regarding how many items in case management can be modified at once. Bulk operations are very limited, potentially due to their back-end database or data retrieval processes that can be improved. Regarding improvements for Torq, when we were onboarded, there were aspects we were uncertain about, such as the number of cases that could be generated, what data we could bring in, how many clients we could onboard, and similar concerns. Initially, we also lacked clarity about the number of playbooks or workflows we could build. Different triggers like system triggers, case-based triggers, and others can be employed without restrictions, but when it comes to on-demand and scheduled jobs, there is a limitation based on the subscription and pricing tier that notably caps the number of workflows we can create. No bulk editing across cases was one issue, along with limited filtering related to single grouping constraints. Additionally, the out-of-the-box case templates provided require substantial modifications before they become usable. There is also a feature in the cases for notes that cannot be searched. They are only visible through the UI, which is another area for improvement. The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially. I am not sure if new customers are made aware of this. It seems that workflows revolving around cases hinder functionality outside of case management, as we have many use cases needing on-demand triggers and schedules for functions like reporting or polling devices. Creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers. While they facilitate optimization and scaling, the support received tends to be very basic. Improvements can be made in that area as well.
Misbah Mohammed Kollathodi - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineering Technical Leader Sre (Cloud/Kubernetes Security) at Cisco
Centralized compliance monitoring has strengthened our cloud security posture and daily governance
AWS Security Hub is something which I basically use to see how much your infrastructure is compliant. It is basically what we call a CSPM, which is a cloud security posture management tool. You can automate the best practices and continue with security best practices; it will give you your misconfigurations and aggregate all your tickets in one place. The best thing about AWS Security Hub is that it is a single point of place where you can get all your misconfigurations without having to go to each service and check. For example, if your business deals with any compliance like PCI DSS or FSBP and ISD, you can check how much your infrastructure is compliant with these standards. Each standard has several security controls, and AWS Security Hub checks these security controls and tells us what percentage your application and infrastructure is compliant with these standards. It also has integration with GuardDuty, Inspector, and other AWS services. In that aspect, it provides a lot of findings. It also supports some third-party product sources. I believe it will reduce your effort to correct those findings and can automate the security tests, consolidate the view of findings across accounts and providers. You can also apply remediation for these findings and automate that; for example, if somebody opens the security group, you can use tools such as Amazon Inspector to close this port when this finding comes. So I would say it is a good tool for cloud security, cloud security posture management, compliance management, and all these things. If you are dealing with sensitive data, it is very critical. A lot of people are using AWS Security Hub today in our company, maybe in every account we have. It is a must for cloud security. I believe bigger organizations use that, so it is a need for our security strategy.
Rifat Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at Corporate Projukti Limited
Has lacked proper integration and consistent support communication
I selected Logpoint for the pricing as it is reasonable. I am located in Bangladesh, South Asia, Dhaka. I have tried to contact Exabeam by mail repeatedly, but there has been no response. My company, Corporate Projukti Limited, including my Bangladesh area head, technical director, and team manager, have sent emails to contact Exabeam solution, but there is no response. There is already a distributor in Bangladesh. The weakness with Logpoint is UEBA. UEBA is recommended, but not extra. Exabeam's UEBA is an extra feature. SOAR is extra, but Logpoint's product measurement is 40 or 50. There is a 10% difference with the UEBA and SOAR, so Logpoint is weak there. I would appreciate extra features in Logpoint such as SOAR. SOAR and UEBA are included features in Logpoint. Logpoint's UEBA is a weak point, while Exabeam's UEBA has extra AI through automation. Exabeam has a license included, and the extra license is an add-on. In Logpoint, it is included, which makes it a weak point.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Almost four or five hours of work is now completed in four or five minutes."
"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."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"What I appreciate most about Torq is that it is an essential part of our system."
"Torq has exceeded expectations by delivering workflows in a timely and lower effort manner than XSOAR, and it meets all my needs while saving a ton of time and targeting $600,000 saved this year, which is a substantial amount of money."
"One of the workflows I manage with Torq looks good and provides faster response, saving time and resulting in happy clients."
"Torq offers the best feature through integration with AI."
"If I review about 100 vendors that I might work with, Torq is definitely in the top five that gave me personally investment back, just because every bit of effort I put into Torq eventually became a workflow that gave it back to me."
"The solution shows us our compliance score."
"It's a security posture management tool from AWS. Basically, it identifies misconfigurations, similar to Trusted Advisor but on a larger scale."
"The most valuable feature of AWS Security Hub is the ability to track when monitoring is not enabled on any of my resources."
"I find all of the features to be highly valuable."
"Security Hub provides insightful information about what is running and where there might be weaknesses."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the scanning of all the cloud environments and most of the compliances available in the cloud."
"AWS Security Hub's unified dashboard does help streamline my process of identifying vulnerabilities, but we don't use Inspector."
"The most beneficial aspect of Security Hub is its proactive capability, allowing us to identify potential security issues before they escalate."
"The most valuable features are the ones that we use the most, which are the search and report facilities."
"It is a good cost proposition, and it works extremely well and very fast."
"The most valuable feature, which is endpoint security, is included in Logpoint, and an extra feature is the integration."
"For on-premises, it is the best solution."
"It is an AI technology because it is using machine learning technology. So far, there is nothing better out there for UEBA in terms of monitoring endpoints and user activity. It is using machine learning language, so it is right at the top. It provides that capability and monitors all the activities. It devises a baseline and monitors if there is any deviation from the baseline."
"The search feature is valuable. The dashboards are also valuable for our bosses. Another valuable feature, which is the main feature of the product, is the centralization of all the logs."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most beneficial was being able to prove, with proper reports, that from a compliance perspective, the company is in control. The service part of LogPoint did modifications or did some additional work to have the proper reports defined."
 

Cons

"Additionally, the documentation for Torq is not very clear. Most of the information is presented in videos, which are not ideal for reading; there are mostly paragraphs and other text-based content."
"The case management piece, due to the platform being an automation-first tool, lacks real robust out-of-the-box case templates or good solutions for creating those without spending a lot of time doing development work, which makes the overall experience poor, honestly."
"The workflow and execution-based charges seem misleading as this was not discussed initially, and creating additional workflows to achieve basic functionalities raises costs significantly, which disadvantages customers."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Torq can probably use more ML and look at what can be closed and what cannot be closed in terms of data classification."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"It was able to capture data but was unable to differentiate between the agent hostname we are using and the hostname that resides on the back end of the Internet."
"There are some issues and bugs that I think need to be fixed, but they are currently not focused on it."
"However, the sheer number of services can be overwhelming when implementing something new."
"The support must be quicker."
"One aspect that could be improved in the solution is its adaptability to different markets and geopolitical restrictions. In certain regions like Thailand, specific services from certain countries or providers, such as AWS or Azure, might be limited or blocked. It also needs improvement in would require configuring the solution more adaptable to AWS infrastructure and function."
"Security Hub is currently not worth investing in, as it requires more configurations and integration with other services to work effectively."
"AWS Security Hub cannot scale up to multiple different cloud environments; it only works for AWS."
"Although AWS Security Hub does a periodic scan of your overall infrastructure, it doesn't do it in real time."
"Feature-wise, we are not able to do multi-cloud. We are doing individual cloud monitoring, and we see other tools are better than AWS Security Hub."
"AWS Security Hub's configuration and integration are areas where it lacks and needs to improve."
"LogPoint is complex and we don't have the skills to maintain use cases or even to extend the use cases."
"Nowadays the trend is going towards the ransomware and the endpoint detection and response. So if they added something for that, that will be very, very good."
"The documentation part is something that needs to be improved, as well as the threat intelligence investigation part."
"We were missing visuals and graphics. Recently, a new version seems to have come out, and it has a new graphical user interface. When I was integrating it, it was usable, but the GUI needed improvement."
"It is complicated to collect daily logs from other systems."
"The interface needs things like wizards that will assist with creating complex correlation rules."
"Sometimes, the product is not stable."
"It is a good product, but its interface or GUI could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The cost is based on the number of compliances, core checks, and services required, and for more than 10,000 recommendations, the charge is just one dollar."
"AWS Security Hub's pricing is pretty reasonable."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
"AWS Security Hub is not an expensive tool. I would consider it to be a cheap solution. AWS Security Hub follows the PAYG pricing model, meaning you will have to pay for whatever you use."
"It's less expensive than the competitors. The Logpoint marketing team is very accommodating and client-friendly. They offer very good reductions in price. They are pretty good in this aspect. They are transparent in their licensing and pricing."
"It's getting more expensive, which is one of the reasons we're looking around just to see if there's anything better value."
"My company used to pay for LogPoint costs annually. It's a cost-effective solution. I'm not part of the Finance team, though, so I'm not sure exactly what the licensing fee is or what license my company had."
"LogPoint seemed like it was a good product, but it was expensive and there wasn't any room to move the pricing when customers needed a lower-costing solution."
"It has a fixed price, which is what I like about LogPoint. I bought the system and paid for it, and I pay maintenance. It is not a consumption model. Most SIEMs or most of the log management systems are consumption-based, which means that you pay for how many logs you have in the system. That's a real problem because logs can grow very quickly in different circumstances, and when you have a variable price model, you never know what you're going to pay. Splunk is notoriously expensive for that reason. If you use Splunk or QRadar, it becomes expensive because there are not just the logs; you also have to parse the logs and create indexes. Those indexes can be very expensive in terms of space. Therefore, if they charge you by this space, you can end up paying a significant amount of money. It can be more than what you expect to pay. I like the fact that LogPoint has a fixed cost. I know what I'm going to pay on a yearly basis. I pay that, and I pay the maintenance, and I just make it work."
"For a hundred user deployment the cost is about $10,000. The next year it would be the same because it's a subscription-based license. There are separate costs as well, for example, if a customer asks for training for their staff."
"Logpoint's pricing is mid-ranged and depends on the number of devices."
"It was on a yearly basis at about $100K. It was not a huge environment. We were running it on our own virtual server environment, which, of course, had a cost. There was hardware and some energy cost, and then there were Microsoft Windows licenses for servers. That's all, but there was nothing in comparison to the licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user186927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Operations at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Feb 16, 2015
Cybereason vs. Interset vs. SQRRL
Capture DB - they all use NoSQL db and hence solve the ad hoc query and 'go back in time' problem with current best of breed SIEM and DLP solutions that rely on real time analysis of incoming logs (and don't store them). This means deeper and quicker iterative threat analysis and assessment…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
What has not worked as well as I hoped with Torq is related to product data management and storing data, although it ...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is for managing IT services and providing faster response.
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
I would rate Torq a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10. I chose this rating because customer service is excellent. I suggest to...
Which is better - Azure Sentinel or AWS Security Hub?
We like that Azure Sentinel does not require as much maintenance as legacy SIEMs that are on-premises. Azure Sentinel...
What needs improvement with AWS Security Hub?
I do not see any areas for improvement in AWS Security Hub itself, but the cost factor is something that is the main ...
What is your primary use case for AWS Security Hub?
AWS Security Hub is something I have used daily as it is a part of my job for cloud security purposes. If you are dea...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for LogPoint?
I rate the pricing at eight, suggesting it's relatively good or affordable.
What needs improvement with LogPoint?
I selected Logpoint for the pricing as it is reasonable. I am located in Bangladesh, South Asia, Dhaka. I have tried ...
What is your primary use case for LogPoint?
I had experience with Logpoint before, and I contacted the Exabeam solution, but there was no response; they did not ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SQRRL
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
AP Pension, Copenhagen Airports, KMD, Terma, DISA, Danish Crown, Durham City Council, Game, TopDanmark, Lahti Energia, Energi Midt, Synoptik, Eissmann Group Automotive, Aligro, CG50...
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Security Hub vs. Logpoint and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.