We performed a comparison between ArcSight Logger and Devo based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Log Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We check a lot of logs in ArcSight Logger because we're running a massive database platform."
"ArcSight provides the basic information that we want."
"The log digestion features from threat intelligence platforms like Recorded Future or Talos are valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the search capability, which is simple to use."
"We have a trigger. So, Logger automatically blocks these IP addresses. We could have Logger put them on a blacklist."
"In terms of ArcSight Logger's most valuable feature, it is their scalability. ArcSight's real advantage is its scalability because they have two layers, including the logger layer."
"It's an efficient solution."
"It's a robust, mature product and you can do some really complex operations and analytics."
"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"Devo provides a multi-tenant, cloud-native architecture. This is critical for managed service provider environments or multinational organizations who may have subsidiaries globally. It gives organizations a way to consolidate their data in a single accessible location, yet keep the data separate. This allows for global views and/or isolated views restricted by access controls by company or business unit."
"The most valuable feature is definitely the ability that Devo has to ingest data. From the previous SIEM that I came from and helped my company administer, it really was the type of system where data was parsed on ingest. This meant that if you didn't build the parser efficiently or correctly, sometimes that would bring the system to its knees. You'd have a backlog of processing the logs as it was ingesting them."
"Even if it's a relatively technical tool or platform, it's very intuitive and graphical. It's very appealing in terms of the user interface. The UI has a graphically interface with the raw data in a table. The table can be as big as you want it, depending on your use case. You can easily get a report combining your data, along with calculations and graphical dashboards. You don't need a lot of training, because the UI is relatively very intuitive."
"The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution."
"The solution should make it possible to integrate network analysis features."
"I would rate the technical support only 5 out of 10. The technical support is not satisfactory."
"We have had problems with archiving."
"I would like to see better scheduling in the next release of this solution."
"I had some latency issues for two months. I had to increase our storage capacity significantly to reduce the latency."
"I think the ArcSight team should try to simplify legacy products for the customers, because that product is not easy to use or to work with. It needs more more competency or appeal to use. We hope Micro Focus is trying to resolve this."
"In the next release, I want to see more intelligence."
"The next release should have AI capabilities."
"The price is one problem with Devo."
"There's always room to reduce the learning curve over how to deal with events and machine data. They could make the machine data simpler."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"Some of the documentation could be improved a little bit. A lot of times it doesn't go as deep into some of the critical issues you might run into. They've been really good to shore us up with support, but some of the documentation could be a little bit better."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"Devo has a lot of cloud connectors, but they need to do a little bit of work there. They've got good integrations with the public cloud, but there are a lot of cloud SaaS systems that they still need to work with on integrations, such as Salesforce and other SaaS providers where we need to get access logs."
"The biggest area with room for improvement in Devo is the Security Operations module that just isn't there yet. That goes back to building out how they're going to do content and larger correlation and aggregation of data across multiple things, as well as natively ingesting CTI to create rule sets."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
ArcSight Logger is ranked 20th in Log Management with 31 reviews while Devo is ranked 26th in Log Management with 21 reviews. ArcSight Logger is rated 7.8, while Devo is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ArcSight Logger writes "A scalable and stable solution that enables users to see all the event logs in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". ArcSight Logger is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security, Wazuh and Graylog, whereas Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Security QRadar, Microsoft Sentinel, LogRhythm SIEM and Datadog. See our ArcSight Logger vs. Devo report.
See our list of best Log Management vendors.
We monitor all Log Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
