Below is the list of blog posts with the “comparison” category.

NXLog Community Edition was launched many years ago and, being cross-platform and highly versatile, quickly became a leading log collection tool. With millions of downloads, it is widely used across on-premises, cloud, and hybrid deployments. While over 70% of users have upgraded to the more feature-rich and robust NXLog Enterprise Edition, many still rely on NXLog Community Edition due to its flexibility and fit for many use cases. However, as technology advances and business and security demands grow, we are excited to introduce NXLog Platform—a modern, comprehensive solution that offers enhanced functionality and performance.

Are you looking to replace Snare? Here’s how NXLog Agent compares in real-world environments. This article will help if you consider a new log collection solution or evaluate alternatives to your existing deployment. It answers key questions from organizations that have migrated from Snare to NXLog solutions. Feature comparison - Snare Agent vs. NXLog Agent Multiple log collection agents are available on the market. While both Snare Agent and NXLog Agent serve similar use cases, NXLog Agent provides broader platform support, more advanced log processing, and greater flexibility in integration.

One of the challenges that security-conscious Windows administrators face is collecting and centralizing Windows event logs. One of the obvious solutions that come to mind is the native Windows Event Forwarding (WEF) feature available on all modern Windows operating systems. WEF offers the convenience of forwarding Windows events to a central event collector without installing and managing agents. To objectively portray the role this valuable technology plays in the larger scope of enterprise log collection, we have written several articles that discuss it:

NXLog supports filtering, enriching, and forwarding logs directly to Splunk Enterprise for further analysis. If you landed on this blog post, you are likely looking for a new log collection solution or seeking to improve an existing Splunk deployment. If so, we hope this article provides you with the necessary information to take the next step toward a better log collection strategy. NXLog and Splunk Universal Forwarder feature comparison Several log collection agents are available on the market, and Splunk Universal Forwarder is one of them.

syslog-ng and NXLog are both powerful log collectors providing flexible log processing. However, you might be in a position where you need to switch from syslog-ng to NXLog. Whether it’s because syslog-ng doesn’t support an operating system or you want to upgrade your log collection solution to one that can be centrally managed, converting your syslog-ng configuration to NXLog is a simple task. How do syslog-ng and NXLog differ? syslog-ng and NXLog are alike in many ways.

Log collection is most closely linked to enterprise security practices—​for example, aggregation and analysis in a SIEM. However, collecting certain logs for reasons other than security is often valuable. It may even be a requirement of your organization for the purposes of auditing, legal compliance, or data retention. Storing all these logs in a database is the most efficient way to manage the data. Finding and managing logs stored as flat files or structured data can be challenging without a database.

How does NXLog Enterprise Edition compare to the IBM QRadar WinCollect event forwarder? IBM QRadar SIEM collects, processes, and aggregates log data to provide real-time monitoring and automated response to network threats. With its powerful correlation engine and specialized modules for risk and vulnerability management, it is no surprise that it is among the highest-rated tools on Gartner Peer Insights. To get the best out of a platform like IBM QRadar, you need to ensure that you send the proper amount of data in a format that it can process efficiently.