DNIF HYPERCLOUD vs Trellix ESM comparison

"The beauty of the solution is that you can develop infrastructure for a data lake using open sources that are separate from the licenses."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of EPS it can handle."

"The response time on queries is super-fast."

"Great for scaling productivity for log monitoring purposes."

"The solution is quite stable and offers good performance. It also works on a virtual machine. We haven't found any issues with it so far. It's been reliable."

"The dashboard is helpful, and it creates visualizations to let staff review event data and identify patterns and anomalies."

"The User Behavior Analytics is a built-in threat-hunting feature. It detects and reports on any kind of malware or ransomware that enters the network."

"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."

"The most valuable feature in ESM is its search and reporting feature. It's really nice."

"The most valuable feature is the correlation rules."

"The support I have received from the vendor has been great."

"The most valuable feature is the capability to correlate different events from different platforms that we feed into it."

"I like the ease of deployment."

"The most valuable features of McAfee ESM are intrusion detection, malware protection, and the device controller."

"The most valuable feature is for the security operation center because it provides visibility of all traffic within the company infrastructure."

"It blocks the things which are not to be allowed. It has an adaptive mode where it learns for itself."

"There are currently some issues with machine learning plug-ins."

"The solution should be able to connect to endpoints, such as desktops and laptops... If this solution had a smart connector to these logs- Windows, Linux, or any other logs - without affecting the performance of the connector, that would be wonderful."

"I feel that DNIF needs to invest more in marketing, considering that it operates at a very competitive speed."

"The vendor is fairly new and it's not as big as some of the international competitors. It's not a mature product. If you ask them to move data, it might take a lot of time."

"The EBA could be improved."

"Dependency on the DNIF support team was frustrating."

"The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used."

"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."

"Cloud integration has room for improvement because they're not full-fledged to integrate with the cloud solutions that come. They use different integration platforms to bring in data, and that needs to be improved."

"It is not a very advanced solution, and it is for very generic use cases. It cannot cope with the advanced requirements that we're going to have. For example, for multiple authentication failures, it is still based on Windows events for detecting multiple login failures, whereas other companies are going beyond and working on implementing two-factor authentication. It is time to correlate the two-factor authentication results with authentification failures, which is not happening with McAfee ESM. The performance of the tool should be improved because it is very slow. The data display on the console is very slow in McAfee ESM. Its data storage is still old-fashioned, and it should be improved and upgraded to the latest versions. They have to come up with some new ideas to match what other leaders in the same domain are doing. For example, in Splunk, when you search for information for the last 60 days or five months, it quickly shows the information, but that is not the case with McAfee. The results should be quicker and faster on the console. They should integrate some additional features such as User Behavior Analytics (UBA) and automation. The threat intelligence part should also be improved on McAfee."

"The initial setup is difficult and could improve."

"The only issue I have with McAfee is the amount of computer resources that it takes... it's definitely impacting some of the other applications that are running on a computer at the same time."

"There should be support for multitenancy in the product."

"There are some banking and transactional cases that are local, South America transactions. I would like to see them add features that can be used locally, to make those transactions more reliable."

"The only drawback is that they don't have any packet capturing or network behavior analysis."

"McAfee ESM is not user-friendly and the log is not accurate. For instance, if I were assigned to generate a log for changes made today, I wouldn't be able to see all the modifications. While Palo Alto allows us to see all changes, McAfee ESM only captures one out of every ten changes. It's crucial to have visibility into all changes made."

"The pricing is based on the log size."

"The solution requires a huge infrastructure and that is costly."

"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."

"The licensing cost is based on EPS."

"It is an inexpensive product. We purchase its yearly license."

"McAfee is the right choice for a low-budget solution."

"We pay for our licensing fees on a yearly basis, and there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

"You should buy the distributed option instead of the all-in-one for environments with more than 1000 end points."

"We renew our license annually."

"The product is slightly expensive."

"The price is good. It's moderate. We follow a pay-as-you-go model. There are different models available, and they can also be monthly. You can choose monthly or yearly. It's very flexible. If our existing customers exceed the current plan, you can just call McAfee and get it extended."