Accelops – An innovative take on Monitoring


AccelOps – An innovation take on Monitoring

We at have done several posts on SIEM. One of the most common request from readers of our SIEM posts is to review Accelops. So this post is our answer to those repeated questions.


How many of you remember Cisco MARS? Well, if you don’t, let me remind you that they were one of the earliest SIEM products around that stemmed from the infrastructure monitoring space. MARS was geared more towards monitoring and reviewing network infrastructure including their utilisation, performance availability and logs. After a brief run in enterprises that were Cisco heavy, the product died a natural death. People who were involved in the product left Cisco and started AccelOps (Accelerate Operations). As a product, they took the fundamentals of data collection and integrated infrastructure log, event monitoring to the data analytics platform. The result is a promising product called AccelOps.

They have since been acquired by Fortinet, marking their foray into the larger Enterprise SIEM market dominated by the likes of HP, IBM, Splunk etc.


As you can guess, by virtue of collecting data from various sources like Network devices and servers, AccelOps is a product that provides fully integrated SIEM, file integrity monitoring (FIM), configuration management database (CMDB), and availability and performance monitoring (APM) capabilities in a single platform.

  • APM Capability: This is their strong suite and it is MARS on steroids. AccelOps excels in capturing statistics to provide insights into how the system health is. This is value in a MSSP/NOC/SOC setup as there is no need for an additional monitoring platform. Again, Syslog or SNMP are your best bets for APM.
  • File Integrity Monitoring: Very few SIEM products (think Alienvault) offer native FIM capabilities and to see it in AccelOps is refreshing. The way they do is no surprise as FIM can only be done effectively using an Agent-based approach and Accelops also does the same.
  • CMDB: Accelops has the capability to keep track of all the elements in an organisation’s network infrastructure like network devices, UPS, servers, storage, hyper-visors, and applications. Using the data, a Centralised Management Database (CMDB) is available in AccelOps. This again is very unique and even AlienVault with all its Unified SIEM branding, does not shine as much as AccelOps does.
  • SIEM: Now that all the data from various network infrastructure is available in AccelOps along with CMDB, the ability to cross-correlates, in real-time becomes easy and AccelOps does that using its own patented correlation engine. The SIEM capability comes with all the bells and whistles one would expect – Rules, Dashboards, Alerting, Analytics, Intelligence, etc.

Now let us look at the Strengths and Weakness of AccelOps as a product

The Good:

  • AccelOps’ combination of SIEM, FIM and APM capabilities in a single box helps in a Centralised operations as well as security monitoring.
  • AccelOps serves as a centralised data aggregation platform for system health data, network flow data as well as event log data.
  • AccelOps has a mature integration capability with traditional incident management and workflow tools like ServiceNow, ConnectWise, LanDesk and RemedyForce
  • From a deployment flexibility, AccelOps excels in virtualisation environments. However, they are also available in traditional form factors. If customers prefer cloud, they are also available for deployments in either public, private or hybrid clouds.
  • From an architecture perspective, they have 3 layered tiers.
    1. The Collector tier does exactly what the name suggests – collects data from end log sources.
    2. The Analytics tier receives data from the collector tier. This analytics tier is built on big data architecture fundamentals supporting a master/slave setup. In AccelOps terms, it is Supervisor/Worker setup.
    3. The Storage tier then serves as the data sink housing the CMDB and the big data file system.
  • Because of the architecture setup, the scalability is not an issue with AccelOps. It does scale well with clustering at Analytics and Storage tiers.

The Not So Good:

  • The most obvious is that AccelOps as a product has relatively low visibility in the market. However, this is bound to change with the Fortinet buy. They will hopefully be seen in more competitive bids and evaluations.
  • While AccelOps tries to be a “Jack of All”, it unfortunately is a master of none. This means that the product has poor support for some third-party security technologies, such as data loss prevention (DLP), application security testing, network forensics and deep packet inspection (DPI).  This hinders the product versatility in large environments.
  • Parsing is a key aspect of SIEM and in this area too AccelOps lacks extensive coverage as seen amongst competition. While most of the popular ones are parsed out of the box, the others require a custom parser development skills, which unfortunately requires steep learning curve or product support to help build.
  • While for Network engineers and analysts, the interface makes sense, from a SIEM view, the usability could definitely be improved. This issue is evident when looking at dashboards, report engines, alerts etc. which seem to be afflicted with information overdose.
  • Ease of deployment is there, however, the configuration takes a lot of time considering the fact that there are several tool integrations to be done before it can generate value. Some of the configurations are really complex and may lead to user or admin being spooked. We were reminded of the MARS days time and again while evaluating this product.
  • The UI, while presents data in a very informative way, suffers from too much clutter hindering usability. While this is a personal opinion, when compared against the likes of IBM, Splunk and even LogRhythm, the AccelOps UI does not excite. We hope that Fortinet brings to fore its UI maturity to AccelOps, thereby becoming much more savvy.
  • Correlation capabilities are very good when it comes to data visibility, compliance and infrastructure monitoring use cases. However, when it comes to Threat hunting, trend analysis, behaviour profiling, AccelOps has a lot of ground to cover.
  • Without Infrastructure data, AccelOps loses its edge. As a traditional SIEM collecting only Event logs makes it look like a pretty basic SIEM. This can be quite an issue in organisations where Infrastructure monitoring is already being done by other tools. Unless customers duplicate data sets across  the tools, the value is poor.


All in All, the product is a well rounded performer when it comes to combined Infrastructure and Security monitoring, however in traditional SIEM bake-offs, they need a lot more flavour to make it exciting. Hopefully the Fortinet buy will do just that. We will continue to watch out for this product and its road map in coming months.

Until next time – Ciao!!!

SIEM Product Comparison – 2016

SIEM Product Comparison – 2016

We at have done several posts on SIEM. After the Dummies Guide on SIEM, we followed it up with a SIEM Product Comparison – 101 deck. The SIEM comparison we did was in 2014. After two years we are taking a look at the SIEM market and comparing them alongside. The leaders in this space according to Gartner are still the following products (in no order):

1. HP ArcSight – Review

2. Intel Security – Review

3. IBM QRadar – Review 

4. Splunk SIEM – Review

5. LogRhythm

In the below post, we have tried to provide detailed explanations of the Strengths and Weakness of these various SIEM products as evaluated in 2016. Finally, we provide a Scorecard for the products based on various capabilities.

HP ArcSight: Since 2014, ArcSight has come a long way. They have added quite a few features along the way that has added to their strengths. For example, Connector load balancing was definitely a welcome addition after several years of being requested.  However, the weakness list is still the same. One of things frustrating users mainly is that the Web architecture for administration and management is not as mature as the thick client.


IBM QRadar: Since 2014, QRadar has continued to maintain its pole position in product ratings and evaluations. There have not been major product announcements after QVM and Incident Forensics other than IBM App Exchange (a Splunk App store style approach to extensions and plugins). While the strong points of IBM QRadar are still true, the weaknesses have started to crop up in areas of operational efficiency and reliability.


Intel Security: This is one product that underwhelms when it comes to realizing its true potential. They checked all the boxes required for monitoring with ADM, DAM, DPI, ATD etc. However, the real problem with erstwhile Nitro has always been stability and management overhead. Two years later, the strengths have increased no doubt, but the weaknesses still remain around reliability.


Splunk: This is one of the products that has gone through several changes in the past two years. They have expanded their capabilities significantly in the “App for Enterprise” space with predefined security indicators and dashboards and visualizations. They have also improved the support for packet captures and analysis. With the purchase of Caspida, behaviour analytics capabilities will come into Splunk. While the strengths column has increased, the weakness column still remains the same.

LogRhythm: The new and upcoming unified SIEM player LogRhythm has come a long way from its humble beginnings. In the past 2 years, LogRhythm has added several new features to their product including but not limited to incident response and case management workflow,  centralized evidence locker, collaboration tools, risk based profiling and behavioural analytics to identify statistical anomalies for network, user and device activity.  This combined with ease of deployment and competitive price has definitely opened up the leaders quadrant to some exciting shake up.  Let’s take a look at the strengths and weakness for LogRhythm.


Overall Scorecard: 

Any evaluation is incomplete without a scorecard. So we have consolidated feedback from various sources and provided a weighted score on the five SIEM products reviewed above.



Based on the review of SIEM products done this year, we feel innovation in the SIEM space has plateaued. The next generation Security Analytics and Big Data technologies are slowly becoming mainstream thereby relegating the SIEM solution purchases to a more compliance driven initiative.

Please share your thoughts on how you would rate the various SIEM products discussed here.

Enterprise SIEM Implementation – Building Blocks


SIEM technology has been around for more than a decade now. We at have in the last few years posted quite a lot on this topic. However, as we talk to several industry folks, one area which lacks clarity is the success mantra for a good SIEM implementation. While most of the discussions around SIEM revolve around the product space (as the vendors will rightly point towards), seldom do people talk about “on-the-ground” approaches to a successful (product agnostic) implementation and operations.

This post aims at giving a “on-the-ground” approach to Enterprise SIEM implementation. In short, we are going to elucidate the various Enterprise SIEM Building Blocks needed for a successful implementation.

First things First

  • This is not product specific and can be applied to any SIEM product you choose to implement
  • This takes into consideration that SIEM implementation has an Enterprise wide value proposition
  • This takes into consideration that SIEM program is a multi-year journey and requires patience and care.

Our Mantra – “The higher you need to go, the stronger your footing should be”. 

The methodology which we would like to discuss in this post is shown diagrammatically below:

Enterprise SIEM – Building Blocks

As you can see, there are several components or building blocks to an Enterprise SIEM implementation. The colour coding should give you an idea of how the various aspects of SIEM implementation are grouped together. In this post, we would like to de-construct this model in detail.

Enterprise Log Management

The most important building block or the foundation of a successful SIEM implementation program is laid down by Enterprise Log Management. While you may think that this is simple, let us assure you that it is not. Enterprise Log Management is the conduit through which you get visibility into your network.  If not done properly, there are chances that you may be blind when a breach happens. There are several steps to a successful Log Management program namely:

  • Define Assets in Scope – IT infrastructure that matters to your enterprise is in scope. The pragmatic way to scope is to start from the Crown jewels (application servers, databases etc.) and work your way to the Ingress and Egress touch points (network devices). This should give you a list of infrastructure assets in scope.
  • Define and Implement Enterprise Logging Policy – Once the assets are scoped, it is important to standardize Logging levels enterprise wide. Typically logging policy is defined keeping in mind practicality and usability.  What I mean by that is, a balance between logging levels and system/storage performance will ensure that security does not impact productivity and business availability.
  • Centralized or De-centralized Log Repository – Building a logging architecture requires foresight into how the organization is going to evolve over a period of time. A central log repository may make sense for most organizations, however a de-centralized, controlled log repository may make sense for some organizations. Choosing the approach determines the course which the other building blocks in our methodology takes.

At Infosecnirvana, we talk about Enterprise Log Management in two detailed posts:

  1. What and How much to Collect – Enterprise Security Logging
  2. What to store and What to filter – Log Filtering

These posts should give you enough details on how Enterprise Log management should be approached and how they should be managed.

Event Correlation

Once the Enterprise Log management foundation is laid strong, event correlation becomes simpler and more meaningful. This is where SIEM comes in to the picture. SIEM as we all know needs data to perform correlation and event monitoring. Enterprise Log Management provides that data. There are several SIEM products out there and we at Infosecnirvana have written several posts on the various SIEM products and how they are similar or differ from one another.

  1. Adopting SIEM – What you need to know?
  2. A dummies guide to SIEM
  3. SIEM Product Comparison – 101
  4. Evaluating SIEM – What you need to know

The above posts should give enough information on SIEM from a technology and product angle.

Use Cases:

Once the logs are collected and correlated into a SIEM solution, putting the “correlation capabilities” to good use is the next step. The best way to do this is with Use Cases. Use cases as you can see from the image above is comprised of two building blocks namely:

  1. Threat Detection Use Cases – These are the basic use cases that can be created and implemented once all the logs are collected in to SIEM. These use cases are “Rule-Based” and detect threats coming from the infrastructure point products themselves. Correlation happens based on these internal data sets. Typical examples are IDS Alert correlated with Web Server logs, Malware alerts correlated with Firewall logs, SPAM alerts correlated with endpoint logs etc.
  2. Advanced Use Cases – The next stage in the evolution of Threat detection Use cases  is to make use of Threat Intelligence and Analytics capability in detecting Security threats and incidents including that of the so called APT style threats. These class of use cases are at the very top of the SIEM use cases food chain and potentially jump into the “Research to Detection” territory, where innovative detection techniques need to be created and utilized in SIEM for threat detection. Correlation here happens based on internal and external data sets combined with machine learning, trending etc.

We at have done a few posts on SIEM use cases and how they can be developed. SIEM Use Cases – What you need to know? is a very popular post that has been referenced in Gartner Blogs and McAfee SOC Whitepaper.

Cyber Intelligence:

Once the Use cases are in place, it is imperative that we start incorporating some of the Intelligence feeds that is available. What Cyber Intelligence does to Use cases is akin to what a compass does to a sailor. While most of the SIEM tools today offer some sort of Intelligence capability, rationalizing and making it part of daily operations is the biggest challenge. In our opinion, gathering and using Cyber Intelligence is an iterative process as summarized below:


It has three specific steps namely:

  • Data Gathering – Data can be open source, community, commercial or raw human intelligence and gathering this requires a bit of technology integration, data management and hunting.
  • Foraging Loop – Basically, foraging loop is nothing but searching for “treasure” from the heaps of data gathered. This is critical step in the realm of cyber intelligence. Foraging is best done by analysts who understand the organization intimately in terms of what is their infrastructure and software spread.
  • Advanced Analysis – Once we have gathered the data, normalized it and filtered all the irrelevant items out, what remains at the end of the “Foraging Loop” is applicable intelligence. Analysing this using traditional techniques like reversing, sink hole analysis, pattern recognition, etc will yield a list of value Indicators of Compromise (IOC).
  • Action & Reporting – Once the IOC is available, we can use them to create content in our defence systems. It can be perimeter systems, it can be SIEM tools, it can be administrative take-downs etc. This is where we make sense about the gathered and analysed intelligence. The Sensemaking Loop is all about this.

Once we convert Intelligence in to actionable IOC data, it is ready to be used in SIEM use cases. Most of the mature organizations, constantly update their monitoring infrastructure with Actionable Intelligence, because IP and Domain blacklists are no longer sufficient to detect threats.

Risk Analytics:

The last capability or the most mature capability in our opinion is the “Risk Analytics” capability. While the term is generic, when you see that in a SIEM parlance, it takes a very specific meaning. SIEM with advanced use cases and cyber intelligence capability provides the most visibility into an organization’s network/assets. However, this visibility is a “point-in-time” visibility. It does not provide “retrospection”. With Analytics capability, organizations can go back in time, analyse things in retrospect, identify common risk patterns over a longer period of time, identify outliers etc. This is in my opinion the fastest growing function in the Cyber space today. When you hear terms like “Security Analytics”, “Behaviour Analytics”, they are all nothing but subsets of the larger Risk Analytics capability. Companies like Securonix, Caspida (Splunk), Exabeam etc, are some of the frontrunners in this space.


As you can see in the entire post, the approach is layered and stage wise. It aims are providing a structured, organic growth path towards generating complete value from your SIEM implementation. Please feel free to share your thoughts on this.

Until Next time….Ciao!!!


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers:

%d bloggers like this: