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

DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator 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
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
AI-SOC (1st), AI-Powered Security Automation (1st)
DNIF HYPERCLOUD
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
28th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (42nd), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (43rd), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (19th)
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator
Ranking in Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) category, the mindshare of Torq is 3.5%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of DNIF HYPERCLOUD is 1.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is 1.8%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Torq3.5%
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator1.8%
DNIF HYPERCLOUD1.7%
Other93.0%
Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR)
 

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.
Kishore Tiwari - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy General Manager - Information Security (Lead ISA) at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Development from open sources is very valuable but a huge infrastructure is required
The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used. The search configuration is a bit different than other OEMs or SIEM solutions like ArcSight or QRadar that are easy to search because they operate similarly. The logic is there and the solution supplies a pretty good explanation. Basically, DNIF spelled out is the opposite of FIND. You have to find commands whenever you want to search something. For example, a highway gets you to your destination but there is an alternate way people don't yet know about. Gartner or Forrester haven't yet studied it. We were a bit nervous when we were trying to get familiar with the solution. We wondered if we could realize ROI because the commands and ways of pulling data were different to us. We raised a case with the support team and their professionals provided the needed support. The command line is user friendly once you understand it. If you need immediate use, then you might want to get assistance from someone who is well-versed in methods for using key patterns to find things. Lengthier files for threat hunting or analysis are needed. The correlation happens, but exporting a large number of files to abstract them is not possible. For example, I want to present raw data to management so I should be able to customize a date range in my query and download the files.
Binu Haneef - PeerSpot reviewer
System Administrator at Sky News Arabia
Comprehensive security management enabled through efficient integration and automation
McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator helps automate routine security tasks. We created customized automation. For example, when we did not have an EDR or XDR solution, we created tasks exclusively for detection and response automation and automatic segregation of infected PCs. The ability to customize the dashboard in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator helps us significantly. The main feature is automation for auto-segmentation and segregation. As we are in an AI era, McAfee can focus on AI tools. Instead of putting manual effort into each security-related task, it can implement more advanced automation using AI. This enhancement could improve cybersecurity significantly. Regarding the reporting area in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, we are satisfied with what we currently have. Our cybersecurity team needs customized reports beyond the default ones. We have more than 20 separate reports for identifying threats, managing, and understanding the security posture of our company and assets.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"As an analyst, it has demonstrated potential to reduce workforce requirements and time needed for related activities."
"Using that one piece of AI, we auto-closed 511 cases in quarter four alone."
"Torq has helped a lot regarding SOC analyst efficiency."
"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."
"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."
"According to positive outcomes, Torq reduced manual work and made incident response more efficient."
"Once I started to use the system and I saw the potential, it changed all of our work in IT."
"Torq has definitely changed the day-to-day experience for our security analysts, as they feel more excited and feel that Torq interface and workflow allow them to build things themselves."
"It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table."
"I like the MITRE table, a feature I saw for the first time in the same solution. There was one MITRE tactic table, which can be used to identify threats if you have all kinds of rules enabled or if you have rules for all the tactics in the MITRE table. There are 14 tables in MITRE, and those 14 tables consist of multiple columns, tactics, and techniques. It was one of the first SIEM tools I saw that had that particular MITRE table. On that basis, you can create new rules and identify existing ones. At any point, if an alert is triggered, it will try to match it to any of those MITRE tactics. I liked that creating a workbook on MITRE business was straightforward. I also like that you can search using SQL or DQL."
"Has a great search capability."
"The benefit of DNIF was that the solution was able to detect any anomalies and identify and prevent any possible security threats or attacks."
"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of EPS it can handle."
"DNIF is much faster, much more responsive, and far superior when compared to competitive tools."
"The solution is quite stable and offers good performance, it also works on a virtual machine and we haven't found any issues with it so far, it's been reliable."
"Many organizations will find the solution has many features that would suit their needs and reduce the number of issues they face."
"This solution reduced a lot of effort to check and confirm that all PCs are running the latest anti-virus signatures and patch levels."
"The automation alert for the ticketing tool is one of the vital features"
"You have to have some experience, however, it's pretty simple to understand."
"The solution provides excellent advanced analytics capabilities and the integration capabilities make it straightforward to integrate McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator with IT workflow systems."
"The solution's best part is that it is very easy to manage McAfee Agent."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the central management console, which is used for DLP, endpoint security, drive encryption, and application control."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator improves our general endpoint security - wherever a user might be tricked into clicking on a link or downloading a file or bringing a file on an external medium or getting it from somewhere on the internet, after having detected that it could be malicious, it blocks it."
 

Cons

"The initial deployment of Torq was not easy."
"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."
"If Torq could enhance its AI features, it would benefit customers significantly by making the platform even more user-friendly."
"I wish Torq's AI assistant for building templated workflows from scratch worked better; when you start with a blank slate, asking AI to help you build or template the workflow out does not go well."
"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."
"We have MCP that we are working with our cloud security platform, and we wanted to connect this MCP to the case management."
"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."
"We have some issues with machine learning plug-ins and I believe they're working on a solution for that."
"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."
"I used version 8 which was not at all stable. The services and processor keep going down, we had to manually keep them up increasing storage space because services are down, and logs not processed."
"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."
"I feel that DNIF needs to invest more in marketing, considering that it operates at a very competitive speed."
"I think DNIF HYPERCLOUD can implement the ability to export more than 100,000. At the moment, we can't go beyond that. So many times, if you're checking for the firewall logs and working on something related to authentication or network-related traffic, while that log count is low, the account goes beyond that. You can't restrict the logs or the amount of data you can export. It's very important for my situation. It would be better if they could increase the capacity of exports. Although there are many more types of searching in DNIF HYPERCLOUD, people still struggle to query out what they want because not everyone is good at SQL or DQL. The easiest way to query out in DNIF is using the GUI-based interface. But in the GUI interface, you can use operator calls. It gets tricky when you want to search for a specific type of event. You don't know where it will be passed and whether it will be consistent. In the initial phase, it's tough for us to use DNIF. You cannot pass every event in a stable DNIF. When we used that particular tool, we used to get those logs, but sometimes many things are not getting passed. So, we used to export the sheet or export the data into Excel and weigh the required details. In the next release, I would like them to improve the export of the columns and make the application more user-friendly. I would also like a threat-hunting feature in the next release."
"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops."
"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."
"The issues with the integration capabilities of the product, specifically the ones that are deployed on an on-premises model, need to be improved."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator needs to upgrade its technology since the solution's EDR function is not good compared to other vendors in the market."
"There is no built-in or easy upgrade of the system."
"It's a little bit complex to configure it, but when you start using it, it is much easier. There are many policies that you need to create, and in three or four places"
"I am not familiar with the newer versions, but the biggest issues we had with our version were false positives and performance degradation."
"As for improvements, I think that putting everything on a cloud and one console would be a great idea and would be useful for customers."
"McAfee's technical support is a bit of a letdown. Also, there's no good support within our region."
"There should be more insights and completeness into the cyber kill chain, similar to CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. It just seems a little outdated in being 100% signature-based without all of the insights and protections that come with CrowdStrike and SentinelOne. Overall, they've got some catching up to do if they plan to compete in the comprehensive EDR space."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution requires a huge infrastructure and that is costly."
"The pricing is based on the log size."
"Price-wise, the product is quite economical. I rate the solution's price as three or four on a scale of one to ten, where one is considered to be a very economically priced tool."
"Compared to other Antivirus products, the cost of this solution is a bit high."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is not an expensive solution."
"$The price of McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is expensive, it is approximately $6,000 to $9,000 per license annually."
"There is a license required to use this solution. If we use the additional components, such as DLP encryption, there is an additional cost. However, it is similar to a separate product altogether. If you want to use that or not, it is optional, but when you use it, it will cost you additional pricing."
"McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator is a cheaply priced product, meaning it is not expensive since McAfee provides a free version of ePO, which includes phone support as well."
"This solution is priced in the mid-range."
"For large enterprise companies, the price should be alright, but for small businesses, the uptake might be slow because, for these clients, the price doesn't look very attractive."
"McAfee tries to package different things into different products, then sell them as different products with different licenses. They just split everything up into multiple things. That's just their sales pitch and how they do it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Security Orchestration Automation and Response (SOAR) solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
16%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
15%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise19
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Torq?
There are some bugs in Torq, of course. They can be present in data transformation, some UI debugging, and other area...
What is your primary use case for Torq?
My main use case for Torq is the automation of cyber security processes through a SOAR platform and APIs. A main exam...
What advice do you have for others considering Torq?
Regarding someone thinking about using Torq, I recommend looking into their provided academy to start working with th...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which is better - Mcafee's MVision ePO or ePolicy Orchestrator?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Mcafee's MVision ePO or ePolicy Orchestrator network secur...
What needs improvement with McAfee MVISION ePO?
There is a question regarding suggestions for additional tools or functions for McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator, and whet...
What is your primary use case for McAfee MVISION ePO?
The question pertains to describing the use case and process for which people utilize McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator.
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
McAfee ePO, ePolicy Orchestrator, Intel Security ePolicy Orchestrator, McAfee MVISION ePO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Mahindra & Mahindra, Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), ICICI Bank, Yes Bank, Tata Motors, RBL Bank
Brelje & Race, Cognizant, Sutherland Global Services, Eagle Rock Energy, Arab National Bank, Bank Central Asia, Kleberg Bank, Leading Mexican Bank, SF Police Credit Union, Macquarie Telecom, Seagate Technology, Blackburn & Darwen Council, California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation, IRCEP, Major U.S. State Government, State of Alaska, State of Colorado, Cemex, Deutsche Edelstahlwerke
Find out what your peers are saying about DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs. McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.