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

NetWitness Platform vs Trellix Network Detection and Response comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

NetWitness Platform
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (38th), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (39th)
Trellix Network Detection a...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
42
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (17th), Network Detection and Response (NDR) (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

NetWitness Platform and Trellix Network Detection and Response aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. NetWitness Platform is designed for Log Management and holds a mindshare of 1.0%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
Trellix Network Detection and Response, on the other hand, focuses on Advanced Threat Protection (ATP), holds 4.1% mindshare, up 3.9% since last year.
Log Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
NetWitness Platform1.0%
Splunk Enterprise Security6.8%
Wazuh5.4%
Other86.8%
Log Management
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Trellix Network Detection and Response4.1%
Palo Alto Networks WildFire7.4%
Microsoft Defender for Office 3656.7%
Other81.8%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2256927 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Information Security, Cyber Defense and IT Risk Management at HCT. at a transportation company with 201-500 employees
A solid SIEM solution that should improve technical support and online resources to be easier to use
A big problem with the product is that we don't have much professional experience in Israel installing, implementing, and integrating this product. There is not enough of a knowledge base. There is no support for this product in this country, so problems have to be resolved through global technical teams. We like to work locally because of the language, and when the product is only supported outside the country, it's a little difficult to implement and use this product. Moreover, AI is something that must be added immediately. Artificial intelligence is a part of the competitors' products, and it's not been implemented for us.
reviewer2840397 - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Cybersecurity Analyst at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Threat detection has improved for zero‑day attacks but alert noise and support still need work
There are many ways Trellix Network Detection and Response can be improved. Trellix Network Detection and Response needs to reduce the alert noise because even after a lot of filtering, there is still a lot of noise which needs to be tuned by the industry vertical. Trellix Network Detection and Response needs to deepen the cloud-native support with parity between on-premises and cloud deployments. Trellix Network Detection and Response needs to improve threat intelligence depth as Trellix Network Detection and Response is not known to have the best signatures or the AI-supported intelligence that competitors may have. Trellix Network Detection and Response also needs revamped documentation because we had a lot of issues trying to find the syntaxes for all the rule-making. We had to search a lot and Trellix Network Detection and Response does not really help with their documentation, as it only covers basic information. The customer service is not that good. Trellix Network Detection and Response needs accelerated customer support to reach out to the top-level heads. Most of the time we are just stuck at the ground level talking to their customer support team, and they are not able to help us because we usually need to connect with the engineering team to help us out with the specifics.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The newer 11.5 version that my team is using has found it to have good mapping."
"Technically speaking, this is a good product."
"It gives the ability to investigate into network traffic in the Net and the organization what we couldn't do before."
"What we are mainly using are the RSA concentrator, RSA Decoder, Archiver, Broker, and Log Decoder."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to write rules and triggers for network communication, and then being able to investigate based on that."
"The solution is really scalable for the high-end power, enterprise customer."
"Technical support is very good; they try to resolve issues with the proper SLAs which are defined by them and they understand the client's requirements as well as the client's infrastructure in a better manner."
"The development of use cases on the SSA console is quite user friendly, which means that the security analyst or the researcher does not have to learn another language."
"For our customers, it added a layer of inspection that might be missed by traditional IPS or antivirus products, and that is the capability of catching new malware that might not have been identified or seen in the wild before."
"The installation phase was easy."
"The most valuable feature is the view into the application."
"The product is very easy to configure."
"The most valuable feature is the network security module."
"It is stable and quite protective. It has a lot of features to scan a lot of malicious things and vulnerabilities."
"Once we had a chance to do our own due diligence, it was clear that there is really nothing else that compares with the FireEye appliance."
"Application categorization is the most valuable feature for us. Application filtering is very interesting because other products don't give you full application filtering capabilities."
 

Cons

"The product's licensing models are complex to understand. This particular area needs improvement."
"Nowadays, their support is a little subpar compared to other solutions. I rate RSA support six out of 10."
"Cross Platform Integration could be improved."
"It is not so easy to customize this product."
"An area for improvement would be better automation and more inbuilt use cases."
"The initial setup is complex. It requires some knowledge in order to set it up."
"Nowadays, their support is a little subpar compared to other solutions. I rate RSA support six out of 10."
"The documentation is not as structured as I would like, personally, and I think that it can be improved and made much more user-friendly."
"It is very expensive, the price could be better."
"Management of the appliance could be greatly improved."
"They can maybe consider supporting some compliance standards. When we are configuring rules and policies, it can guide whether they are compliant with a particular compliance authority. In addition, if I have configured some rules that have not been used, it should give a report saying that these rules have not been used in the last three months or six months so that I disable or delete those rules."
"Stability issues manifested in terms of throughput maximization."
"The negative aspect is support."
"It is not a very secure product."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The customer service is not that good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to the competition, the is price is not that high."
"The new pricing and licensing mechanisms are fair. I would advise always to get the full solution (i.e., not only Logs)."
"RSA NetWitness Logs and Packets do not have a subscription model, it's a one-time purchase. There is only a perpetual license."
"The product price was reasonable for my region and the market."
"Many clients are not able to purchase the packet capability because there is a huge amount of data, and the cost depends on the number of EPS (Events per second), as well as the number of gigabytes of data per day."
"In comparison to other SIEM solutions such as Splunk, NetWitness is less costly."
"It provides tools to assist in selecting the appropriate license and usage scenarios."
"We have yearly licensing costs. The license fee can be based on the volume of EPS. Some organizations may have, as a gentlemanly gesture, 10,000 EPS and get a 3,000 EPS license but actually use 5,000 EPS."
"The user fee is not as high but the maintenance fee is expensive."
"FireEye is comparable to other products, such as HX, but seems expensive. It may cause us to look at other products in the market."
"The tool is a bit pricey."
"The pricing is a little high."
"Its price is a bit high. A small customer cannot buy it. Its licensing is on a yearly basis."
"It's an expensive solution."
"Because of what the FireEye product does, it has significantly decreased our mean time in being able to identify and detect malicious threats. The company that I work with is a very mature organization, and we have seen the meantime to analysis decrease by at least tenfold."
"There are some additional services that I understand the vendor provides, but our approach was to package all of the features that we were looking to use into the product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Log Management solutions are best for your needs.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

VS
Manager, Enterprise Risk Consulting at a tech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Feb 26, 2015
HP ArcSight vs. IBM QRadar vs. ​McAfee Nitro vs. Splunk vs. RSA Security vs. LogRhythm
We at Infosecnirvana.com have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we are following it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. So, here it is for your viewing pleasure. Let me know what you think by posting your comments below. The key products compared here are…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise20
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetWitness Platform?
The pricing is comparable to others, and I consider the cost to be intermediate. Specific cost details are unknown to me.
What needs improvement with NetWitness Platform?
There is currently no need for improvement in the SIEM ( /categories/security-information-and-event-management-siem ), though there could be potential enhancements by integrating with AI.
What is your primary use case for NetWitness Platform?
I use NetWitness Platform ( /products/netwitness-platform-reviews ) in the financial industry as a good product with excellent capabilities and integration with various devices.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Trellix Network Detection and Response is very great.
What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?
I would like to see in Trellix Network Detection and Response more explanation about some details of the threat, and I wish it had more actions that you can take to contain the host or move it some...
What is your primary use case for FireEye Network Security?
My main use case for Trellix Network Detection and Response is providing support for our customers, and one of our customers has Trellix, so we had to provide monitoring or specific XDR tools for t...
 

Also Known As

RSA Security Analytics
FireEye Network Security, FireEye
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Los Angeles World Airports, Reply
FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about NetWitness Platform vs. Trellix Network Detection and Response and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
894,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.