The threat hunting capabilities in general are great.
Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) threat hunting Reviews
Showing reviews of the top ranking products in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM), containing the term threat hunting
IBM QRadar: threat hunting
reviewer1584831 says in an IBM QRadar review
Solution Architect Cybersecurity at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
reviewer1609413 says in an IBM QRadar review
Senior IT Technical Support at a training & coaching company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The solution is primarily used for threat detection and response. QRadar can be integrated with other services from IBM such as Watson, among others. The main need is for threat detection, incident response, and dealing with threats or hunting threats.
What else? I mean, it's always you're looking for threats. Usually, whoever buys this SIM solution or buys QRadar, for example, is looking for hidden threats and they get the logs to see what's happening within their system. They want a solution that looks very deep inside in order to correlate those logs and see if there's any information that they can get out of those logs or even live packets that are spanning through their networks. Therefore, it's usually threat hunting. That's the main thing, Others might use it to understand the system, and how it's performing overall. However, that's the lesser use case.
ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM): threat hunting
DavidBrown13 says in an ArcSight Enterprise Security Manager (ESM) review
Security Operations Director at Axon Technologies
If you have employees with knowledge, the solution scales vertically and horizontally. You can just sit there and say, "I'm ingesting this many more log sources, I need this much more processing, and this much more storage," and you can just drop and place. It's easy to scale because we're using clusters and blade servers, so we just slap in a new blade, add it for the cluster, and now it's scaled.
We have SAN storage, all high-speed disks for the 90-day storage, and then mechanical disks for the 188-day storage, and then you go to cold storage after that, which is disk as well, and it's a SAN, so we just swap in new JBODS every time we need more storage.
There are about 40 people using this solution from an analyst point of view within my company. We have threat hunters, endpoint protection research, vulnerability research, and security analysts on levels one through three. Pretty much anyone that operates in a security operation center is using it. We run three shifts, 24 by seven. Each shift is an eight-man team of analysts, and then we have endpoint protection subject matter experts, forensic subject matter experts, and threat hunting subject matter experts all using it Monday through Friday. At any point during the day, there's about 40 active users on the solution. All in all, I think we have 150 named accounts inside of it, but usage, there's about 40 at any one time on it.
I rate the scalability as an eight out of ten.
Splunk: threat hunting
ManojSingh says in a Splunk review
Senior security consultant at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
One of the most valuable features is threat hunting. We can do threat hunting and identify if there is any malicious activity happening within our environment, which is a key feature for us.
LogRhythm SIEM: threat hunting
Our company manages the solution as a threat hunting platform for a semi-government client in the Hong Kong insurance industry. We collect logs for video, active directories, antivirus, and firewalls to consolidate them in the solution.
From the central log collector, we build detection policies to identify threats or possible breaches. The solution also serves as a data storage platform to troubleshoot issues and find root causes.
In addition, logs that include performance data are created for devices such as routers and switches to monitor the availability of the office network.
We also perform ongoing maintenance of the solution and all components to ensure everything runs smoothly.
AT&T AlienVault USM: threat hunting
The use case is for companies that want to have more visibility in their environment and want to apply governance. This solution is used for compliance management, vulnerability management, threat hunting, and threat protection.
Fortinet FortiSIEM: threat hunting
ArcSight Interset / Intelligence: threat hunting
We have 34 clients. In terms of devices, there are over 120 devices.
We will increase its usage when we get clients who are seeking such services. Currently, we don't have many clients who are seeking such threat intelligence or threat hunting services. At present, we are also learning about Splunk. In the future, we might migrate our setup to Splunk.
Securonix Next-Gen SIEM: threat hunting
reviewer1691604 says in a Securonix Next-Gen SIEM review
Lead Security Engineer at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
The monitoring, analysis, and visualization of data that Securonix provides is good. However, there are some things that I would love Securonix to change. For example, they don't allow us to make changes on the graphical reports that they have integrated into the platform. We have to create our own. If we just want to take out one thing, our page should allow us to change that template just for our platform. I'm not talking about changing others' platforms; this is just for my platform. They should allow me to make changes according to my scalability. I would like a little bit more changes in the analytics and visual views that they already have out-of-the-box in the platform. They are working on this, but I have not heard from them for a while. I'm satisfied with the visualization that they have, but I would like to get some more out of it. For example, I am taking the report and manually making changes. I want all those changes already integrated and automated, so they are automatically done in the product.
I would not say its threat hunting is easy or difficult to use. It is medium because it totally depends on the data that is coming to you. It does not depend on the platform. It depends on whether you can find the correct attribute that you need to look at, then you can go further on that. They are working on this. They are introducing more features, e.g., they have a couple of updates pending at this time. They are working on it to cut down the steps. If I am doing 28 steps right now just to onboard our data, then they are cutting those steps down. They are also putting more automation in the solution. While they are working on these improvements, it is just a matter of time.
It ingests 85% of all our log sources already built into the product when investigating threats. If the data sources have the functionality, Securonix will create a custom parser for us on a request. If the functionality is not there in the product, then there is a difficulty, but we can still ingest it through the file base, etc. However, I am not a big fan of the file base because a user is creating a file per day for data that was generated the day before. Specifically for activity that has already taken place, we can prevent it, but we cannot stop the activity.
reviewer1924686 says in a Securonix Next-Gen SIEM review
Cyber Security Analyst at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
It was very easy for us to do our manual threat hunting. We had a lot of instances where we found our internal users exfiltrating data. We were able to see that they were exfiltrating data. We could confirm that through the platform by taking a deeper look, which was very nice. It is user-friendly and handy. It allowed us to look at all kinds of activities and logs.
It provides actionable intelligence on threats related to the use cases. After you have done the configuration, it triggers an alert for any incident. This actionable intelligence is very important because it allows us to respond in time without missing the window of being able to take an action. Sometimes, threats are small, and the indicators do not pop up, but with manual analysis, we can get a complete view. So, it is very important to have real-time triggers.
We have been able to find a few true positives. Based on the triggers from the tool, we got to know that people have been exfiltrating data over a period of time. They had been doing it in small amounts, and that's why it went unnoticed. After the tool notified us, we discovered that one or two users have exponentially exfiltrated data over a period of time. Without the solution, just by looking at the logs, we wouldn't have known that. The tool understood the behavior and triggered a notification, and we got to know that. The users were not just sending our data to themselves but also to another vendor. They were contractors, and they were exfiltrating the data to another vendor. They were about to leave the company, and we were able to catch them before they left.
It reduces the amount of time required for investigations. If I had to check logs from different log sources or tools from different vendors and create tickets, it would have taken time. With SNYPR, we were able to perform a lot of actions within the same platform, and we were also able to push tickets to our SOAR management tool. Everything was in one place. We didn't have to navigate between different things. It was helpful for incident management. It took time for analysts to check whether an alert was a false positive or not and provide the right evidence. Having incident management within the tool reduced time in creating and closing some of the incidents. Instead of 30 minutes before, it was reduced to 10 to 15 minutes per incident. We didn't have back-and-forth navigation. Everything was in one place.
It saved us a couple of hours of our day-to-day activity because everything was consolidated. Once I logged in, one or two hours were enough for me to look at everything and identify things to take an action on.
It has definitely helped us with threat management. Because of the sample use cases that we saw from Securonix, we were able to design a few of our own use cases. We would not have thought of those use cases in the past. We were able to add use cases that were helpful for our data internally. We were able to understand logs even better and create our specific use cases. It was good learning.
Jeanpierre Soto Salvatierra says in a Securonix Next-Gen SIEM review
Head of Cybersecurity at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
We used a traditional SIEM where everything was very manual. It did not have threat intelligence or threat hunting of compromises, while Securonix has those features.
We changed because we wanted a good tool to automate certain manual processes so that everything is more flexible. With Securonix, you have the option of integrating with other indicator-of-compromise services, and that helps create a more powerful platform and eliminate false positives.
Francesco Andre Castro Montoya says in a Securonix Next-Gen SIEM review
Security Developer at a tech consulting company with 201-500 employees
Securonix provides us with a fine-tuned environment. It helps eliminate false positives with certain parameters.
It is a SIEM that works automatically when it comes to behavior and the analysis of certain parameters that we did not have visibility into before. It is very productive for our business. So far, from what we have seen, Securonix is very useful.
Securonix provides "enrichment" of event information thanks to connectors with Third Party Intelligence and that has helped to make us more efficient in our investigations. Threat hunting that used to take two to three hours can now be done in less than one hour because we have certain graphs configured within the platform that allow us to search for more detailed events in a shorter amount of time. The training we have received has been absorbed quickly by our analysts and we have managed to do more in less time.
Another benefit is that, as a SaaS environment, it allows us to free ourselves from support issues. We escalate everything directly with Securonix.
DNIF HYPERCLOUD: threat hunting
Arpit Bisen says in a DNIF HYPERCLOUD review
Cyber security engineer at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees
We use this solution for threat hunting, log monitoring and related things. We are customers of DNIF and I'm a cybersecurity engineer.
The solution's command line should be simpler so that routine commands can be used. The search configuration is a bit different than other OEMs or SIEM solutions like ArcSight or QRadar that are easy to search because they operate similarly. The logic is there and the solution supplies a pretty good explanation. Basically, DNIF spelled out is the opposite of FIND. You have to find commands whenever you want to search something. For example, a highway gets you to your destination but there is an alternate way people don't yet know about. Gartner or Forrester haven't yet studied it. We were a bit nervous when we were trying to get familiar with the solution. We wondered if we could realize ROI because the commands and ways of pulling data were different to us. We raised a case with the support team and their professionals provided the needed support. The command line is user friendly once you understand it. If you need immediate use, then you might want to get assistance from someone who is well-versed in methods for using key patterns to find things.
Lengthier files for threat hunting or analysis are needed. The correlation happens, but exporting a large number of files to abstract them is not possible. For example, I want to present raw data to management so I should be able to customize a date range in my query and download the files.
Devo: threat hunting
We looked at Humio and Splunk. Splunk was too expensive, so we ruled them out right away. Devo was the only one we went all the way through the hoops with.
Devo is on par with Splunk. It's definitely farther ahead than Humio was. Splunk has more apps, more integrations, because it's been around longer and it's bigger, but ultimately the querying language is as useful. They're different, but there's nothing I can do in Splunk that I can't do in Devo. Once I learn the language, they're equivalent. There isn't anything necessarily better with Devo, but Splunk is kind of an old standard, when it comes to threat hunting.
Devo is definitely cheaper than Splunk. There's no doubt about that. The value from Devo is good. It's definitely more valuable to me than QRadar or LogRhythm or any of the old, traditional SIEMs. Devo is in the next gen of cloud SIEMs that are coming. I think Devo plans to disrupt Splunk, or at least take a slice of the pie.
I wouldn't say that Devo ingests more data compared to any other solutions. But the thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, "Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows." I can break it down that way. That entity-based querying, where you're creating an entity that's complex, is much more powerful than the old legacy vendors. You can do it with Splunk, but with Splunk you have to specify the indexing upfront, so that it's indexed correctly. With Devo, the way it lays it out on disk, as long as you know what you want and you tell them what you want laid out on disk, it tends to work better.
I've been happy with Devo. They're a smaller company, so they're more hungry for your business than, say, a Splunk. They're more willing to work with you and be customer-focused than a Splunk is, for sure. And that's the same with QRadar or any other big ones. That's a plus.
One of the immediate improvements that come to mind is the amount of hot, searchable data. In the SIEM we had before, we were only able to search back 90 days of hot, searchable data, whereas here we have 400 days worth. That definitely has improved our threat hunting capabilities.
We're also able to ingest quite a bit more data than we were before. We're able to ingest a lot of our net flow data, which if we had sent that to our previous SIEM would have brought it to its knees. So the amount of data that the analysts are able to see and investigate has been a really big beneficial use case. I'd say that's the biggest benefit that it's provided.
I myself do not leverage the fact that Devo keeps 400 days of hot data to look at historical patterns or analyze trends. A lot of times I will look at that to see the log volumes, the traffic, make sure there are no bottlenecks as far as how log sources are sending to Devo. I would say that the analysts definitely for certain cases will go back and try to retroactively view where a user was logging in, for example. At the moment, we haven't really had a use case to push the limit of that 400 days so to speak, and really go really far back. We definitely use the past couple of months of data for a lot of the analyst cases.
This is an important feature for our company especially with the recent SolarWinds attack, which was a big deal. We did not have Devo available, but because that happened so far in the past, it was a struggle to pull that data for it to look for those IOCs. That was definitely a really big selling point for this platform with our company.
Devo definitely provides us with more clarity when it comes to network endpoint or cloud visibility. We're able to onboard a lot of our net flow logs. We are able to drill down on what the network traffic looks like in our environment. For the cloud visibility, we're still working on trying to conceptualize that data and really get a grasp around it to make sure that we understand what those logs mean and what resources they're looking at. Also, there's a company push to make sure that everything in the cloud is actually logging to Devo. As far as cloud visibility, we as a company need to analyze it and conceptualize it a little bit more. For network visibility, I would say that Devo's definitely helped with that.
The fact that Devo stores the data raw and doesn't perform any transformation on it really gives us confidence when we know that what we are looking at is accurate. It hasn't been transformed in any way. I'd definitely say that the ability to send a bunch of data to Devo without worrying about if the infrastructure can handle it definitely allows us to have a bigger and better view of our environment, so when we make decisions, we can really address all the different tendencies. We're collecting a lot more types of log sources than we were before. So we can really see all sides of the issue; the vast amount of data and the ability to really take our decision and back it up with the data, and not just random data but we can use a query and display the data in a way that backs up the decision that we're making.
Devo helps to release the full potential of all our data. The Activeboards like the interactive dashboards that Devo provides really help us to filter our data, to have a workflow. There are a lot of different widgets that are available for us to visualize the data in different ways. The Activeboards can be a little slow at times, a little bit difficult to load, and a little bit heavy on the browser. So sometimes the speed of that visualization is not quite as fast as I would like but it's balanced by the vast amount of options that we have.
That's one of the big things that like all security companies, security departments really purported having that single pane of glass. The Devo Activeboards really allow us to have that single pane of glass. That part is really important to us as a company to be able to really visualize the data. I haven't found the loading speeds have become a significant roadblock for any of our workflows or anything, it's an enhancement and a nice to have.
We all want everything faster, so it's definitely not a roadblock but the ability to represent the data in that visualized format is very important to us. It's been really helpful, especially because we have a couple of IT managers, non-technical people that I am onboarding into the platform because they just want to see an overall high-level view, like how many users are added to a specific group, or how many users have logged in X amount of days. The ability to provide them not only with that high-level view, but allow them to drill down and be interactive with it has really been super helpful for us as a company.
Devo has definitely saved us time. The SIEM that we were on before was completely on-prem, so there were a lot of admin activities that I would have to do as an engineer that would take away from my time of contextualizing the data, parsing out the data, or fulfilling analysts requests and making enhancements. The fact that it is a stock platform has saved me a ton of time, taking away all those SIF admin activities.
I wouldn't say that it really increased the speed of investigations, but it definitely didn't slow it down either. They can do a lot more analysis on their own, so that really takes away from the time that it takes to reach out to other people. If you went back 90 days, you had to go through a time-consuming process of restoring some archives. The analysts don't have to do that anymore, so that also cuts off several days' worth of waiting. We had to wait for that archive restoration process to complete. Now it's just you pull it back and it's searchable. It's right there. Overall, I would say Devo has definitely saved us a lot of time. For the engineering space, I would say it saves on average about one business day worth of time every two weeks because a lot of times with on-prem infrastructure, there would be some instances where it would go down where I'd have to stay up half the night, the whole night to get it back up. I haven't had to do that with the Devo platform because I'm not managing that infrastructure.
reviewer1685601 says in a Devo review
Digital Security VP at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Prior to Devo, we were using QRadar and Elastic. We switched because Devo is more powerful and the scalability is better.
With respect to analyst threat hunting and incident response, you can create a lot of complex dashboards and consequently, it is easier to perform a deep dive. It is really aligned with Splunk in terms of capabilities and usability. Our analysis had data from different solutions to work with and they preferred to use what was coming from Devo.
We work with Elastic, Sumo Logic, Splunk, other SIEMs, and more. These solutions are very comparable to Devo when it comes to threat hunting and incident response. It just depends on the end customer and what solution will work best for them.
Some advantages of Devo are multi-tenancy and scale. It was built to be multi-tenant which uses resources in an intelligent way. This helps being able to manage multiple organizations. Some of the security solutions you need to create a separate instance for every single organization, which can be inefficient.
The other advantage or sweet spot of where Devo shines is price/volume at scale. Some of the other vendors may be a better solution at lower volumes of data ingest. Devo really accelerates once you get above 500 gigs or a terabyte a day. Cost-wise, once you start hitting that terabyte mark or above, some of the other vendors won't necessarily compare in price or scale. We have seen it where others would need a lot more TCO infrastructure to manage the same volumes that Devo can handle.
We evaluated Splunk and LogRhythm. Splunk had great analytics but at that time, two or three years ago, their cloud wasn't as developed as it is now. Also, pricing was another major issue.
I do know that Splunk is a lot more challenging when it comes to threat hunting. You have to know the queries to be able to write in the Splunk query language, and it's a little bit more challenging, whereas Devo seemed to be a little bit easier.
Devo is very much like Excel, where you open up a window and hit data search. So, the workflow for threat hunting was very good and it was seamless. They had a lot of good breadcrumbs and it had a good workflow as it related to threat hunting or threat detection.
From a log parser perspective, Devo is able to ingest more data when compared to other solutions. By default, we can ingest any log source that we need to with Devo. With Splunk, at least when we did our evaluation, that was a little bit less on the scalability, and then LogRhythm, we really had a challenge with.
Dennis Pope says in a Devo review
Security Delivery Senior Manager, Cyber Solutions Architect/Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
The strength of Devo is not only in that it is pretty intuitive, but it gives you the flexibility and creativity to merge feeds. The prime examples would be using the synthesis or union tables that give you phenomenal capabilities. There is such a disparity in how, say, a network feed or an endpoint feed comes in. They're all over the range, not only in the information they present, but in how that information is categorized. The ability to use a synthesis or union table to combine all those feeds and make heads or tails of what's going on, and link it to go down a thread, is functionality that I hadn't seen before.
It also provides high-speed search capabilities and near real-time analytics. I haven't had any problem with it in those contexts. The high-speed search and near real-time analytics are important to us because when it comes to incident response, we have a certain amount of time to turn these events and incidents around. That's how we're graded. That responsiveness, where it's not waiting on any results, is critical to how we do our jobs and how we stay alive in this game.
And because of the ease of integrating Devo with the SOAR solution, we've created an API for a visualization capability, and that works pretty easily. I'm usually an incident response, content development, threat hunting guy. But I was able to do all this stuff on the back end myself. The way it's set up makes it easy for someone who is not a back-end engineer to go in and set up that kind of integration.
We look for historical patterns and analyze trends with that data. That historical data is critical when putting separate events together and trying to detect a pattern or when looking for a low-and-slow, advanced, persistent threat. Without that reach-back capability, you would just see these one-offs and you would never put that information together. What makes a SIEM work is not only seeing the real-time event feed but being able to reach back and put things together. That's at the core of any SIEM solution.
reviewer1823226 says in a Devo review
Security Operations Center (SOC) Director at a tech company with 51-200 employees
The most valuable feature is that it has native MSSP capabilities and maintains perfect data separation. It does all of that in a very easy-to-manage cloud-based solution.
And when the Devo Exchange came out, for access to community-driven content, I was one of the first folks who used it. I was part of the advisory board that really pushed to get that product created for them. I'm all about the Devo Exchange. When compared to Devo's peers in the SIEM market, that was the area that they were lacking in: the ability to share types of content. Other platforms have definitive user bases and large external communities that look at how to do different types of alerting, configuring, and threat hunting within their platforms. Because it was relatively new to the market, Devo just didn't have that built up yet. The fact that they have not only built it but have integrated it directly into their product is absolutely fabulous.
The Devo Exchange is literally point-and-click. If you see something you like, you click on it. It tells you whether you have the applicable tables to make that content work. If you do, you can click a button and it automatically installs for you. All you have to do is go in and create any alerting rules that you want associated with it. It's absolutely amazing.
The Exchange has made it much easier for us to deploy new content. We don't have to spend a whole lot of hours cycling through and creating the content ourselves when someone has created similar or exactly the same content that we would be creating. It has shaved 15 to 20 percent off of our deployment times for new alerts, saving us the time that we would have put into building those things.
In addition, there are things in the Exchange that we weren't sure how to do. Once we saw them in the marketplace we pulled them down and they have given us deeper insights into the data that we have.
Seceon Open Threat Management Platform: threat hunting
Microsoft Sentinel: threat hunting
Sean Moore says in a Microsoft Sentinel review
Lead Azure Sentinel Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
This solution has helped to improve our security posture in several ways. It includes machine learning and AI capabilities, but it's also got the functionality to ingest threat intelligence into the platform. Doing so can further enrich the events and the data that's in the backend, stored in the Sentinel database. Not only does that improve your detection capability, but also when it comes to threat hunting, you can leverage that threat intelligence and it gives you a much wider scope to be able to threat hunt against.
The fact that this is a next-generation SIEM is important because everybody's going through a digital transformation at the moment, and there is actually only one true next-generation SIEM. That is Azure Sentinel. There are no competing products at the moment.
The main benefit is that as companies migrate their systems and services into the Cloud, especially if they're migrating into Azure, they've got a native SIEM available to them immediately. With the market being predominately Microsoft, where perhaps 90% of the market uses Microsoft products, there are a lot of Microsoft houses out there and migration to Azure is common.
Legacy SIEMs used to take time in planning and looking at the specifications that were required from the hardware. It could be the case that to get an on-premises SIEM in place could take a month, whereas, with Azure Sentinel, you can have that available within two minutes.
This product improves our end-user experience because of the enhanced ability to detect problems. What you've got is Microsoft Defender installed on all of the Windows devices, for instance, and the telemetry from Defender is sent to the Azure Defender portal. All of that analysis in Defender, including the alerts and incidents, can be forwarded into Sentinel. This improves the detection methods for the security monitoring team to be able to detect where a user has got malicious software or files or whatever it may be on their laptop, for instance.
We have definitely seen an ROI. In traditional SIEM solutions, we need to have people to maintain those servers and work on the upgrades, whereas when it comes to the SaaS-based solution, we don't need resources for these activities. We can leverage the same resources for Sentinel monitoring and building effective detection rules for threat hunting.
The automation rules and playbooks are the most useful that I've seen. A number of other places segregate the automation and playbook as separate tools, whereas Microsoft is a SIEM and SOAR tool in one.
It provides us with very high visibility. It allows us to see a lot holistically across our environment in Azure. It integrates very well with other products like Defender.
It helps us prioritize threats across our enterprise. There are many things we can do to deal with prioritizing threats, such as having automation rules that automatically raise the priority of certain incidents. We're also able to make changes to the rule sets themselves and say, "I believe this to be a higher priority than is listed in the tool."
Prioritization is probably the most important thing to us because as an organization, we have a number of threats coming in at any moment, and each of them has its own valid investigation path. We need to know which ones are business critical and which ones need to be investigated and either ruled out or remediated as soon as possible. Prioritizing what to work on first is the biggest thing for us.
If you have the right licenses and access to all the products, it's fairly easy to integrate these products into Sentinel. Sometimes they don't pull as much information as possible, and I've noticed that there is a cross-functional issue where these tools will flag and alert themselves.
We can have it configured to create an alert in Microsoft Sentinel, but sometimes it doesn't create a bridge between them. When we finish our investigation and close the ticket on Sentinel, it sometimes doesn't go back to the tool and update that. That's the only issue that I have found with the integration. Everything else is straightforward and works well.
The solutions work natively together to deliver coordinated detection responses across our environment. It's probably one of the better-engineered suites. In other places, I've experienced an endpoint detection and response system that's completely different: proprietary coupled with a proprietary and different SIEM tool or maybe a different sort of tool. They are individual tools, and it can sometimes feel like they're engineered differently, but at the same time, they integrate better than anything else on the market as a suite of tools.
These solutions provide pretty comprehensive threat protection. A lot of them are technology agnostic, so you can have endpoints on Linux and Mac OS. It's pretty comprehensive. There's always a little oversight in any security program where you have to balance the cost of monitoring everything with the risk of having some stuff unmonitored, but that's probably an issue outside of this tool.
It enables us to ingest data from our entire ecosystem. It's difficult to ingest non-native data. It's not as easy as in Splunk because Splunk is probably the leading SIEM tool. If you have a native tool that's out of the Microsoft security stack, you can bring it into Sentinel and have an alert on it.
This ingestion of data is vital for our security operations. It's the driver behind everything we do. We can do threat hunting, but if we don't have logs or data to run queries, then we're pretty much blind. I've worked in places where compliance and regulatory adherence are paramount and having logs, log retention, and evidence of these capabilities is extremely important. One of the more vital things that our organization needs to operate well, is good data.
A lot of the alerts come in from other tools, so sometimes we have to actually use that tool to get the proper information. For example, if we get an alert through Defender for Office 365, to actually see an offending email or attachment or something like that, we have to go into the Defender console and dig that out, which is inconvenient. As an aggregator, it's not bad compared to the other solutions on the market. In an ideal scenario, having more information pulled through in the alerts would be an improvement.
A lot of Sentinel's data is pretty comprehensive. The overarching theme with Sentinel is that it's trying to be a lot of things in one. For a UEBA tool, people will usually have separate tools in their SIEM to do this, or they'll have to build their own complete framework from scratch. Already having it in Sentinel is pretty good, but I think it's just a maturity thing. Over the next few years, as these features get more fleshed out, they will get better and more usable. At the moment, it's a bit difficult to justify dropping a Microsoft-trained UEBA algorithm in an environment where it doesn't have too much information. It's good for information purposes and alerting, but we can't do a lot of automation or remediation on it straight away.
Our two primary uses for the solution are incident management and threat hunting. We use Sentinel and other Microsoft security products for security investigations, threat, team, and incident management purposes. The tool is deployed across multiple departments and locations, with around 8,000 total end users.
We use multiple Microsoft security products, the full Defender suite including Defender for Cloud, Cloud Apps, and Identity, all integrated with Sentinel.
Integrating multiple solutions is straightforward; as they are all Microsoft products, it's easy for Sentinel to ingest the logs and data connectors. The process is very simple, and we can configure log sources or data connectors in Sentinel in a couple of clicks.