{"id":1432,"date":"2005-06-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-06-17T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2005\/06\/17\/symantec-to-unveil-security-intelligence-tools\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:39:22","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:39:22","slug":"symantec-to-unveil-security-intelligence-tools","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2005\/06\/17\/symantec-to-unveil-security-intelligence-tools\/","title":{"rendered":"Symantec to unveil security intelligence tools"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Symantec plans to announce two new appliances: Security Information Manager 9500 and 9550.  Due out in September, the appliances are aimed at helping users analyze data from firewalls, antivirus software and other security products.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Additionally, they will let users correlate their data with security intelligence from Symantec&#8217;s DeepSight Threat Management System.   This analysis of security data could give customers a better view of the attacks waged on their networks and help them raise more-effective shields, Symantec said.  The Security Information Manager editions will succeed a current software product called Incident Manager.<\/p>\n<p>The appliances will be easier to install and can crunch through data faster than Incident Manager, according to Symantec.  The 9550, priced at $59,000, is the main device, while the 9500, which costs $39,000, would be used as an extra node in a cluster, the company said.  Both devices are 2U rack-mountable Linux-based servers with dual 3GHz Intel Xeon processors.  The 9550 has more RAM memory than the 9500 and features 1.2 terabytes of storage space, Symantec said.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/news.com.com\/Symantec+to+unveil+security+intelligence+tools\/2110-7355_3-5752072.html?part=rss&#038;tag=5752072&#038;subj=news<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1432","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-product"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1432"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1432\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3919,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1432\/revisions\/3919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}