IBM Security QRadar Reviews

We primarily use the solution for some compliance, including military compliance such as PCIDSL, ISO 27001, and ISO 27002, and then some other specifications around them. There are also some industries that need to analyze the log and events, and then build and create some rules to put forward.

The solution has very good Watson Analyzer integration. It's one of the key differentiators if you compare it to other solutions. 

The solution offers very good BSM support. There's 400 BSM support out of the box. That's a huge advantage. with it, you are actually adding almost all the devices that are available in an IT environment.

This is a distributed application, meaning that a customer can stack small and then scale it so that they can expand pretty effectively. You can use, basically, the same product in an SMB or a large enterprise. 

You can deploy the solution and leave it. It's very unfussy.

When it comes to deployment, it's very flexible.

Right now, if you look at the compatibility, if you need to deploy QRadar in a physical appliance you have only two choices of server, their own or a Lenovo server. In today's world, you cannot keep something tied to such a big brand. Clients want to be able to use whatever type of server they want. It's very limiting for many. You need that flexibility to deploy on any Intel platform.

IBM doesn't have people in every corner of the world. Oracle, for example, is actively training and certifying people so that companies will have access to local connections. IBM is lacking this, and therefore it can be difficult to get qualified support when a customer needs it. They should try to replicate the Oracle approach to training and certifications.

I've been using the solution for the last three years or so. It's been a while.

The solution is very stable. It's reliable. You don't need to worry about bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's pretty much a set and forget kind of setup.

The solution scales well. It's stackable, which means you can start small if you want and then just stack more and more. It's perfect for any size of organization, from small to large.

We have sold this solution to six organizations, however, as a whole, we have around 10 customers in Bangladesh. Their sizes vary.

In terms of some of the IBM support we recently have received, we've had some issues. While it should be 24/7 support, sometimes we have to wait an extended period. Our customers have had to wait an extended amount of time - in some case like two or three months. Some support we used to get was from the US team and they were good. However, support from elsewhere isn't really that great, and certainly not up to their level of service.

The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward.

Since it is coming with a predefined image, anybody can actually deploy this on a VM or ia physical appliance. The deployment is flexible.

A control installation takes four to five hours to initialize the console. After that, deployment is dependant on the customer requirements. However, simply initializing the appliance takes two to four hours depending on the allocated resources, therefore, it's quite quick.

From a product perspective, we have three persons in the product team. However, in the deployment and support team, we have five people. We tend to sell and help implement this product to our customers.

We're using the latest version of the solution.

We are a reseller. We're selling the solution to end customers.

Whenever there is a requirement, a security requirement, or an AFM requirement, we actually position IBM QRadar. We proactively promote the solution and the market, so that we can build a community around QRadar. We're trying to build a community around QRadar so that we can increase sales. We need to have local resources to promote the products. Therefore, we are trying to double up that community of QRadar users. We're doing knowledge sharing among our network. We're changing information so that we can have a knowledge-based group so that we can promote the product to more customers.

While I'd recommend the solution, I'd caution that, for any IBM product other than hardware, the local resources are not that great as they are not often available. I can see why some customers are afraid to add this product. It's different from, for example, Oracle, which is doing product training everywhere and is actively certifying people. 

Overall, aside from support issues, we've been happy with the solution. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I am a system integrator. We have installed it on-premises, on the cloud, in distributed environments, and all other environments for our clients.

We have worked with other solutions, such as LogRhythm and Splunk. Compared to others, IBM QRadar has the best price-performance ratio so that you are able to reserve minimum costs. It starts settling in fast and gets the first results very quickly. It is also very scalable.

There are a lot of things they are working on and a lot of technologies that are not yet there. They should probably work out a better reserve with their ecosystem of business partners and create wider and more in-depth qualities, third-party tools, and add-ons. These things really give immediate business value. For instance, there are many limitations in using SAP, EBS, or Micro-Dynamics. A lot of things that are happening in those platforms could also be monitored and allowed from the cybersecurity risks perspective. IBM might be leaving this gap or empty space for business partners. Some larger organizations might already be doing this.

It would be very nice if IBM can make some artificial intelligence part free of charge for all current QRadar users. This would be a big advantage as compared to other competitors.

There are companies that are going in different directions. Of course, you can't do everything inside QRadar. In general, it might be very good for all players to provide more use cases, especially regarding data protection and leakage prevention. There are some who are already doing some kind of file integrity or gathering some more information from all possible technologies for building anything related to the user and data analysis, content analysis, and management regarding the data protection.

I have been using this solution since 2011.

If the engineers are missing some technical knowledge from IBM documentation, then it might get interesting, but you can always rollback. Usually, when you are implementing innovations, as a system integrator, you usually do less on the test environment, and then you check if this works. If bigger organizations and customers want to do it by themselves, they should really stick to this approach and use a lot of material, community pages, and channels.

There is absolutely no problem with scalability. It works very fine, especially when you are running just clients. It doesn't matter how many variants you have all across the culture. You can practically have different continents. It doesn't matter how many collectors are running. You can easily distribute the current license to multiple users, and all the collectors can upload it without any restrictions.

We have worked with other solutions. Splunk is a long-term trap because it is very expensive, and it gets more and more expensive. It has different times, and it is integrated with different products. When you combine that together with licensing, it obviously fails. You are paying a lot more than QRadar.

LogRhythm has some problems with stability. We were the first partner to do some integrations with LogRhythm, but we had some problems. ArcSight was smaller at the time but not anymore. It is now a competitor. Fortinet is very good for those who are already using some software products from them.

It usually happens within two or three hours, but it also depends on the preparation. If good homework is done, then the initial setup is totally flawless. It is ready very soon. We then try it and wait for maybe a couple of days more. After that, we start fine-tuning, and then we do advanced installations.

For us, such projects usually don't start without any experience with technology and the concepts. When you are buying it, you need to know all the information systems, create a list of tasks and priorities, and understand the use case better. 

A lot of such innovations or implementations initially can be done by one person, two persons, or maybe a team of five dedicated administrators who later on will be using this technology or solution. You need to understand that there are different roles of people who are working with cybersecurity and threat management, such as an analyst, a simple technical maintenance performer, an administrator, a user behavior analyst, etc.

It is not something like a next-generation firewall, next-generation intrusion prevention, or the most complex tool that you have got, which you can install and configure and then see if it runs smoothly. It is a completely different story in QRadar or any similar technology. These solutions or technologies have to be managed continuously. 

The biggest mistake that innovations people usually make is that they don't plan the total cost of the technology tools for a period of five years, especially because they don't know what kind of new threats are coming out. Despite that, IBM is very early in doing some kind of new content packs and including data enforcement, etc. When new threats are coming in, you effectively need to adjust. The more complex use cases you have, the more complex the responses will be. You might have different systems or you might be working in different time zones.

When buying, people think that 70% to 80% percent of the initial purchase is the total they are going to spend within next year at this time, and then every next year, they will spend like 20% or 25% on the technical support, maintenance, development of the system, etc. When you are talking about a huge, complex, and central cybersecurity threat management system, it is more likely that you are implementing a document management system and some complex CIP systems, etc. The cost of the license and the cost of the hardware initially can make up around 20%, 30%, or less percent of the total budget that is needed for quality management of such solutions for a longer period of time. 

Some people think that if they buy this for 100,000 pounds or euros, the next year, they can buy just annual subscriptions for 25,000 or 20,000. You may have some internal costs for the license, etc. If you are buying for, let's say, 100,000, you might have to make your budget for 200,000 more, because it needs to have certain people who are doing everything with the solution. You need to train them and send them to the IBM international technology academies and events such as Visor to know about its management and maintenance. You probably also need to do some certification, so you need to go for a course for implementation. A lot of internal work should be done to adjust the solution with other departments, and those other departments usually don't like such central, overseeing, and controlled solution. They, later on, learn that they can get a lot of different, useful reports out of it without doing additional work. 

I would rate IBM QRadar an eight out of ten. Every technology has some weaknesses and strengths. It has a lot of points to improve, but based on everything that we have seen in the market and from other customers, this is, so far, at least in Europe, the best solution.

We primarily use the solution to develop software, for some device controllers.

The solution is relatively easy to use.

The product helps increase development speed.

The customization is very good, as are the dashboards and the security.

I'm not sure if there are any features missing from the solution. It's pretty complete.

The pricing of the solution is a bit high. If they could lower it, that would be ideal.

I've been using the solution for three years or so at this point. It hasn't been too long.

The solution is quite stable. It doesn't have bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash on me or freeze. It's reliable.

I only really use the solution myself. I can't speak to the scalability of the solution.

I've never had to reach out to technical support. I can't speak to their responsiveness or knowledgeability.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It's pretty straightforward and simple. We didn't face any real issues during the deployment process.

The price can be expensive, however, it's all relative, as it helps speed up development, which can save money for the organization. 

The payments for the product are made on a yearly basis.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. I'm the only user and I use the desktop version of the solution. I'm basically using it because it's here and I have access to it.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations, however, if it is right for them depends on their need.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the product at an eight. We've mostly been pretty satisfied with it.

Our primary use case with IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics is seeing if there are log-ins from the same ID's but from different locations, this is one use case. Or if MAC addresses keep changing, this is another use case. Lastly, if the risk level is high, like with different IP's. These are the three use cases we have.

I really like the feature we have with the logs, that if there are any credit card numbers  being used, like a PII, you can just use rejects and you can mask it. This is a really good feature in QRadar.

In terms of what could be improved, it would be easier if you didn't have to long escape for a bar sync. If you have to, the logs are not automatically barred, so you have to guide the whole atmosphere.

Additionally, there should be integration with IBM Guardian. 

Lastly, there should be an extension where we can get the reports. This could be an extension to the dashboard with the Guardian or another product with limited technology, for example IPS. Now, we only have IBM. Basically, it needs more and more integration models.

I have been using IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics for a month or two.

In terms of stability, in my current company, QRadar is working fine. But in my previous organization that was using QRadar, we experienced some QRadar failures. There were two or three times the data was wiped out instead of transferring to EGA and we had to restart QRadar from scratch and all the data was lost. It happened a lot. Maybe it was due to lack of management since it was a new company.

We do have experience with support. We get support from the IBM people in Karachi, Pakistan.

They're good.

The initial setup was really easy, it was really straightforward. I got it done in one day.

What advice would I give? I want the certification to be very honest. I typically like the hands-on with QRadar, they're quite different.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate IBM QRadar User Behavior Analytics a seven.

I have used other solutions, like LogRhythm, for a few use cases like ransomware detection, etc.. and there were less false positives there. With the ransomware especially, it was very thin there. We actually have very few use cases and there were lots of false positives with QRradar. If I compare the AI function and the logarithms I think it needs some improvement. 

It is a complex product compared to LogRhythm.

It has provided support for several log sources, which has historically been problematic/unsupported by competitors. It is easy to make changes on the fly to default parsers to customize fields/mappings to our use cases.

• Ease of use
• Time to value in implementation
• Single pane of glass for analysts and SIEM administrators

• User/identity modeling needs improvement. However, it seems that they are already focusing on that. 
• Needs better visualization options beyond the time series charts and a few other options that they have.

We have definitely not encountered any issues with stability.

We have definitely not encountered any issues with scalability.

Better than average versus their competitors.

We previously used McAfee and ArcSight. We made the switch to IBM QRadar for scalability, ease of administration and use.

It is incredibly easy to deploy. All the appliances are flexible in the roles that they serve and are all managed the in the same way. Adding log sources is very straightforward, along with device updates, etc., which are all centrally managed.

Pricing and licensing are competitive. Their new licensing options allow logs to bypass the correlation engine for a flat rate, which is also appealing for log data that is compliance-driven for a small amount of money.

We evaluated  ArcSight, LogRhythm, Splunk, etc.

Understand how your analysts need to use SIEM to execute use cases. This platform can collect and normalize data better than just about anything (if you want it to), but it will not be useful if it is not presented in a useful way.

Normally, an offense comes in and an offense is something negative, it triggers when certain events don't comply with the rules, to put it plainly, it is something that will have impacted your environment very negatively. Once it comes through, you can then see from the QRadar log sources, who or what triggered the offense.

For example, if an IP is browsing somewhere where it shouldn't be browsing. Let's say that one of your log sources reported it back to QRadar. You can see if the IP that browsed on certain websites where it shouldn't be browsing. When you right-click and go to the threat protection network, that will normally show you who is browsing, where that IP is coming from, what type of website it is browsing, and if it is good or bad. If it's bad, it will give you recommendations on how to resolve the issue.

The threat protection network is the most valuable feature, because when you get an offense, you can actually trace it back to where it originated from, how it originated, and why.

I would like to see a more user-friendly product. I would like them to make it more user-friendly. At this stage, you need to use a lot of regular expressions to do your searches.

In the first year I used it, there were a few stability problems. In the previous three years, there haven’t been any major stability issues.

I've seen no scalability issues in any of the environments where I am working at the moment. I've seen how it handles a lot of load. I'm talking about a 5,000-user environment. It can handle a lot of logs and events coming through simultaneously.

If you spec it properly, with the proper hardware requirements, then it doesn’t crash. I've seen how people give it way less specs than it should have, then it does crash. But that was the fault on the users’ side, and not the fault of the product.

I would give technical support a rating of an eight out of 10. When they help you with a call for a problem with the product, which I've had twice, the next day, they roll out an update worldwide for all their products to be patched on that problem.

They lose too much time, in my opinion. Normally, you struggle a bit to get a hold of them and get to the correct person to assist you. Even though this isn't a very big delay, it usually takes about an hour. However, in my company, an hour can make a very big difference in my life. For example, it will take me about an hour to an hour and a half to get support from them. I'm a person who loves to get it done now. So if you don't mind waiting about an hour, then it can be very good support. When you log a call with IBM, it takes them about an hour to start working on the problem.

The setup was very straightforward. It's basically, "next, next, type in machine details and next”, then you are finished.

IBM's Qradar is not for small companie. Unfortunately, it would be 'overkill' to place it plainly. The pricing would be too much.

I wasn't completely part of the whole process when they chose a product. I know they evaluated AlienVault, which unfortunately, I do not have any experience with, neither was I part of the whole processes. I'm not able to provide pointers as to why the company chose IBM QRadar. I believe it's because we are a partner with them.

Just spec it correctly and it will do its job for you. It has an active community. IBM patches the product regularly when problems are picked up. I haven’t heard about a lot of problems from other people using the product.

Maybe the best way it helped our organization is that QRadar is well prepared for PoCs. When you are doing PoCs, you just install the solution and you can show it to the customer.

It has great benefits because we don't spend a lot of time to set it up. There are a lot of features that are there out-of-the-box. It's great to do a PoC with customers and to reduce the money spent on the implementations.

The most valuable features are all the implementations, the plug-ins, and the User Behavior Analytics (UBA). All that stuff is really cool.

We are using the solution a lot on the customer side. We like the strength of the platform, basically. I know there is no other product like QRadar.

We thought about what was missing and it was the analysis of the user behavior. However, with the User Behavior Analytics (UBA), it's much less complicated.

I recently attended a conference presentation on machine learning, and it is a great plug-in to UBA. It will help us a lot because a lot of customers want to analyze their user behavior patterns.

Maybe there should be more custom rules in the exchange. Basically, we are using a lot of threat rules, so maybe they'll develop something like that. It will be better.

I would like to see improvement in the technical support. Sometimes, when we do patching or something like that, it creates some problems. Maybe they could test the patches and the OEM product better.

The stability is not bad. We had some problems with patching, but there are problems with all software.

We had the problem when we patched from Version 7.2 to Version 7.2.8. There were some problems with the authentication tokens. It didn’t go so well, but we solved it with the help of technical support and it was very quick. I think that's cool.

Sometimes, we have a problem with support. We are also using QVM (IBM Security QRadar Vulnerability Manager) and I think it is a little bit buggy for now. We have a lot of problems with it. It should be better.

In terms of scalability, there is no doubt about it: It is perfect.

The quality of technical support depends on the agent. Sometimes, it's hard to get the person who you need. Sometimes, it's better to create a ticket when the USA is working because I think they can help you better.

We had McAfee, but we are ending our use of it. There are only some small implementations that are running with it. We are no longer developing with it. I think in the future, we will switch to QRadar. This is because we don't want to have two separate platforms.

RSA enVision was being used with one of our banking customers. However, we transferred to QRadar last year.

We implemented the solution from the scratch with our customers. We have a lot of implementations that they can check.

The setup was very complex. We have integration with a customer service desk and a lot of customization. It's the best thing that we can create our own app and adapt it to QRadar.

We attended the IBM master class to help us with an SDK to develop our own apps. Some of our customers are banks and they have a lot of things to do. Sometimes the features they need are not in QRadar, so we have to customize the solution a little bit for them.

We have a security department in the Czech Republic. We are basically only implementing IBM security products.

Definitely try it. Do a PoC with a customer. You can get the value for the customer quickly. It's great.

These features make it easy to operate the application:

• Integration with multiple platforms
• Ease of rule making
• Manufacturer support (IBM)

We use QRadar for application security, generating customized rules of correlation according to the operation of our business. It extends the security of our most critical assets.

From my point of view, they should improve the backup procedures. QRadar does not allow sending backups by FTP or SFTP, limiting the tool. I had to make a script but it is a manual process. It would be great to have it automated.

I have used it for approximately five years.

We did have stability issues. Some errors were generated when applying updates.

We have not needed to scale the solution.

It has taken a long time for support to respond to our request regarding AIX.

We didn’t have a previous solution. We have always used QRadar.

The initial configuration is simple; the maturation of the application is complex. Not because of the application of QRadar, but because they include many factors, such as the identification of critical assets and how we can secure them, with the application.

QRadar is a very expensive application but it is a good product. My advice is to validate with other correlator solutions and validate which product is right for the organization.

We did evaluate other similar products that are good, such as McAfee ESM and HPE ArcSight.

First, identify the most critical assets to be included in SIEM and then the most critical events of my organization. With that, you avoid bringing unnecessary events into SIEM.

It's a very good and versatile correlator.