SIEM Vendors - Have you used or evaluated?

Security & GRC

Exabeam8%

Alienvault25%

Sophos21%

LinkAmerica3%

Splunk30%

Other10%

1116 PARTICIPANTS
6.2k viewscircle icon4 Upvotescircle icon31 Comments
Sort by:
Co-Founder in Services (non-Government)2 years ago

Why not have multi-selection? :) I worked with most and others. besides " LinkAmerica"

Director of IT in Education2 years ago

We have Microfocus SIEM

CIO in Finance (non-banking)2 years ago

I have experience using Elastic's SIEM,   it integrated well with the operational work we already doing in Elastic

Director of IT in Software3 years ago

Very happy with Azure Sentinel. Cost-effective, easy to implement and deploy, month-to-month subscription. Best of all, Microsoft is investing a lot in the security space so it will only get better with time.

Lightbulb on1
Director (CIO) of Technology & Privacy (CPO) in Healthcare and Biotech3 years ago

We've been pretty happy with Rapid7/InsightDR

Lightbulb on1

Content you might like

Does your organization leverage an Enterprise Architecture Solution/Tool for EA Practice?

Yes76%

No17%

We are in the process of selecting an EA tool8%

View Results

I'd like to discuss the privacy and data security implications of compromised accounts where a CoPilot (such as Microsoft's) is profiled on an account. It's clear that this poses a significant security risk, as a CoPilot with access to all our Graph services presents a unique attack vector. Those interested in learning more about what can be accessed and seen should feel free to ask. In cases where an account has been hacked, a thorough data-mining activity is often necessary to assess the extent of the breach. Have you thought about?

I don't have any concern about.16%

I feel there is a gap... but I haven't thought about before75%

I already have something on track to fix it6%

Other1%

View Results

Does someone have advice on how they have balanced the risk/reward as it relates to introducing Open-Source Software to organization? My org is dipping its toe into the OSS world and the architecture and risk governance teams are looking to get ahead of these requests by coming up with policies and standards for OSS technology being brought into our environment. To clarify, this is not for software development and CI/CD pipelines, SDLC etc. This is for installing solutions that already exist out there (Zabbix, GreyLog, Prometheus etc.) into the organization's environment. We are looking to provide a balance on the obvious risk with the ability to move fast (like everyone else now).

As part of our NYSE IPO prep, we’re debating how to communicate our system hardening efforts in regulatory disclosures (e.g., SEC Form 20-F, SFC).

Would you recommend sharing % compliance (e.g., “85% CIS Tier 2”) or sticking to qualitative descriptions of how we identify and mitigate risks? Also, do SFC/ISO 27001 expectations require full ISMS integration, or is a % model acceptable?

We’re preparing for an IPO on the NYSE as a Foreign Private Issuer and evaluating CIS Benchmarks to measure OS and database hardening.

Our proposed tiers:
• Tier 1 (70–80%) baseline
• Tier 2 (85–90%) for sensitive data
• Tier 3 (95–100%) for mission-critical systems

Is 80% compliance defensible for IPO due diligence with SEC or SFC? Should Tier 3 be considered mandatory for critical systems? And can compensating controls (e.g., PAM, microsegmentation) offset gaps in legacy environments?

SIEM Vendors - Have you used or evaluated? | Gartner Peer Community