![Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform vs. Unisys SANArena 6000 Series [EOL] report](https://www.peerspot.com/assets/media/images/icons/pdf-c33db68f.svg){kind=icon}
![Unisys SANArena 6000 Series [EOL] Logo](https://images.peerspot.com/image/upload/c_scale,dpr_3.0,f_auto,q_100,w_64/1kbbriykz8jqvvl9ix7gcbkab0s5.png?_a=BACAGSGT)
![Unisys SANArena 6000 Series [EOL] Logo](https://images.peerspot.com/image/upload/c_scale,dpr_3.0,f_auto,q_100,w_30/1kbbriykz8jqvvl9ix7gcbkab0s5.png?_a=BACAGSGT){kind=small}
![Unisys SANArena 6000 Series [EOL] Logo](https://images.peerspot.com/image/upload/c_scale,dpr_3.0,f_auto,q_100,w_40/1kbbriykz8jqvvl9ix7gcbkab0s5.png?_a=BACAGSGT){kind=small}
The replication technology that Hitachi Virtual Storage Platform uses is quite older, and the replication methodology they employ for data between the data center and the production and standby database shows no significant improvement in that particular field. With respect to storage administration, I'd like to see more clarity on the encryption side; data being stored in an encrypted manner is essential, but the customer or end-user doesn't understand which encryption is being used and doesn't have a direct view stating that their data is encrypted using AES 256 or DES, or whatever standard they follow. This lack of transparency may not be acceptable during audits.
