ASPIA vs. D3 Security

D3 is clearly tailoring their approach to large organizations with a significant geographical footprint who are largely in need of a tool that provides robust analytics and activity graphing to analyze productivity and supervisory efficiency at the executive level. However, small to medium-sized organizations and those with narrow geographical footprints may find the investment vastly more expensive than the return. The implementation of minimum purchasing guidelines means that smaller departments will be forced into purchasing tools they have little to no use for, and medium-size departments will be paying a high price for features they do find helpful but could get elsewhere for a substantially lower price. Additionally, small to medium-sized users may find that D3's focus on large organizational level tools is less helpful than some smaller competitor's software which provides a number of capabilities with more operational relevance for environments like office buildings, college campuses, university police departments, and housing associations. Overall, I would recommend D3 to large organizations who have need of the advanced tools included in their more expensive modules. The lack of some smaller levels of customization, 1st line operational features, and the high-end user interface is less important at that level of implementation.

Incentivized

• Great Automation in incident response.
• Reduce complexity and security threats.
• Best SOAR security platform.

Incentivized

• A lack of documentation of the administrative interface.
• Additional training is needed to take advantage of all of the features.
• Remediation and post-incident activities are not supported.

Incentivized

• More stability in aggrieved systems.
• Drops in cyberattacks from early reports to 34%.
• Cost savings of 12% per year.

Incentivized