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

AWS Security Hub vs NetWitness NDR comparison

Why PeerSpot?
Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 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)
NetWitness NDR
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) (48th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (34th), Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) (58th), Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) (23rd), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (19th), Extended Detection and Response (XDR) (40th)
 

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.
reviewer1259418 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Cyber Security Analyst (SAFe Agile) at a transportation company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Advanced threat detection undermined by issues with blocking
NetWitness Endpoint's blocking feature does not work properly - if there's a malicious process, it's not possible to kill it via a custom rule unless and until it's flagged as malicious. For example, if you put IOCs in the form of hashes, it's not possible to block those IOCs - the system will alert you, but they can't be blocked. In the next release, NetWitness Endpoint should include regular expressions for blocking processes and sub-processes, the ability to block IPs, and scalability and integration with the ServiceNow platform or other ticketing solutions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Any request that comes in, regardless of how complex it is, I can accomplish it with Torq."
"Torq has impacted my organization positively by allowing us to earn time and invest resources in other projects that are more meaningful and more interesting, pushing deeper into what a SOC is, and building our processes."
"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."
"With Torq, I automate actions while achieving SLA compliance and streamline alert investigation processes much better."
"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."
"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"If someone asks your team how vulnerable or compliant you are with your infrastructure, you can show findings from AWS Security Hub that demonstrate a ninety-plus percentage compliance rate."
"AWS Security Hub provides comprehensive alerts about potential compliance issues with CIS standards. The integration with third-party tools is another excellent feature. All our workloads are on AWS."
"The solution is very good at detection and providing real-time alerts."
"The best feature of AWS Security Hub is that you can get compliance or your cloud's current security posture."
"Easily integrates with third-party tools"
"AWS Security Hub's unified dashboard does help streamline my process of identifying vulnerabilities, but we don't use Inspector."
"AWS Security Hub has very good integration features. It allows for AWS native services integration, and it helps us to integrate some of the services outside of AWS. They have partners, such as Amazon Preferred Network Partners (APN). If you have different security tools around APN, we can integrate those findings with AWS Security Hub reducing the need to refer to different portals or different UIs. You can have AWS Security Hub act as a single common go-to dashboard."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it is easy to manage...It is a scalable solution."
"The log correlation is good."
"The interface of this solution is very flexible and easy to use."
"It is very easy to use, and its usability is great. The use cases are also very easy. The visualizations of the use cases are magnificent. You cannot find this in any other solution. From my point of view, it is great."
"The solution is stable."
"NetWitness Endpoint has enabled us to detect attacks that bypass the first stage of cybersecurity, like zero-day and advanced attacks."
"This solution allows us to locate the malware in real-time."
"RSA NetWitness does market analysis in a more granular form. It gives you full visibility."
"We like the solution doesn't have to be managed by an IT department; it's easy to use and you can still check the machine without the IT department being involved."
 

Cons

"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"However, we did encounter some problems with custom steps, which definitely affected our progress, and the speed of bug fixes is also a bit slower than expected."
"Regarding stability, I have noticed some lagging, crashing, and downtime, which is one of my largest gripes."
"Torq can be improved by adding some more features, such as adding more automation and providing a no-code option so I don't have to code for everything."
"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"Torq does extensive marketing saying that SOAR is dead and markets itself as an all-in-one solution, but this is not actually true."
"AWS Security Hub should improve the time it takes to update. It takes a long period of time when updating. It can take 24 hours sometimes to update. Additionally, when integrating this solution with more security tools, takes time."
"The solution should be easier to learn and use"
"The user interface, graphs, and dashboards of the solution could improve in the future. They are not very sophisticated and could use an update."
"I would like a more fine-grained capability for creating custom rules and a more user-friendly experience programmatically in writing queries and configuring custom security rules, making it quicker and easier."
"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."
"Whenever my team gets some alarms from the central team, my team needs to initiate whether it's a real or false trigger. The central team needs to keep adjusting to the parameters or at least the concerned IPs, whether it's really from the company's pool of IPs, so the trigger process can be improved. In the next release of AWS Security Hub, I'd like a better dashboard that could result in better alert visibility."
"Right now, there are some difficulties we're facing with AWS Security Hub, and we need our central team to mitigate the issues."
"I would like to see Security Orchestration and Response Automation (SOAR) integration."
"The solution is modular, for example you can buy the RSA ePack, which you buy as a module is not part of the conduit solution. They could include it and have it as an all-in-one solution."
"The problem with this product is that it's a bit slow."
"NetWitness Endpoint's blocking feature does not work properly - if there's a malicious process, it's not possible to kill it via a custom rule unless and until it's flagged as malicious."
"We would like to see the hunting and investigation features of this solution improved, in order to provide better visibility of issues."
"RSA NetWitness Endpoint is a scalable solution. However, the problem which we normally face is in terms of the migration of the solution."
"I don't see this solution being very scalable."
"This solution needs an upgrade in reporting. I have heard from RSA that they are working on this, but as of yet it is not available."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Security Hub is not an expensive solution."
"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."
"The price of the solution is not very competitive but it is reasonable."
"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."
"There are multiple subscription models, like yearly, monthly, and packaged."
"The price of AWS Security Hub is average compared to other solutions."
"The pricing is fine. It is not an expensive tool."
"It is an expensive product."
"I do not have any opinion on the pricing or licensing of the product."
"NetWitness Endpoint is less costly than its competitors, but it offers fewer features."
"It is highly scalable. It can be bought based on your requirements."
"They can easily adjust if you have the requirements which are required. If you have a budget cut or a budget constraint, they can bend."
"The pricing is not very economical. It is a quite costly product for India. One thing is that when you purchase it, you have to purchase a module separately."
"The cost depends on the number of endpoints that you want to monitor, but it is not expensive."
"We are on a three-year contract to use RSA NetWitness Network."
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%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 Business10
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
SQRRL
RSA ECAT, NetWitness Network
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Edmunds, Frame.io, GoDaddy, Realtor.com
ADP, Ameritas, Partners Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Security Hub vs. NetWitness NDR and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.