AWS GuardDuty Reviews

We are only using it for a client's requirements; we are simply building it and selling it to the client.

Amazon GuardDuty is used on private infrastructure for our clients. The application is not publicly accessible; it is hosted internally.

GuardDuty has been used to set the CloudWatch alarms. Assume that both scans are detected, or something similar, we have just enabled CloudWatch alarms for those use cases so that any such use case is detected. The alert will be triggered, and we have configured and integrated Amazon GuardDuty with all of the other seven accounts to have the central HPU.

The correlation back end is the solution's most valuable feature. Like in the backend, it is collecting all the data, which I think is pretty interesting, and coordinating everything, which is another good thing.

While sending the alerts to the email, they are not being patched. we have to do the patching and mapping manually. If GuardDuty could include a feature to do this automatically, it will make our job easier. That is something I believe can be improved.

For example, suppose you want to know when an alert is sent to your mailbox. The information is in JSON format. It would be helpful if that could be sent to the mailbox in a human-readable format.

I believe it can be improved in a variety of ways. If we can build our own use cases instead of using Microsoft Sentinel alone, that would be ideal.

I have been using Amazon GuardDuty for two to three years.

I have used it for the last 12 months.

Amazon GuardDuty is a stable product.

Amazon GuardDuty is scalable.

We have not had any issues that required us to contact the GuardDuty AWS vendor. It's straightforward and effective.

The initial setup is straightforward. We simply click on the app, and that's it.

The deployment can be done in a few minutes. We don't have to spend a lot of time there. It will take some time, to integrate everything one by one, which is why we did it manually, otherwise everything else was straightforward.

Pricing is determined by the number of events sent. It's fine, and it's not a problem from our perspective.

My recommendation is to go for the master setup that will be beneficial to you.

There are some limitations where we cannot modify use cases to meet our needs; we must do additional work, such as setting up CloudWatch alarms and SNS, and things are not patched. There are some restrictions. I'll just suggest that you have some skilled resources with patching knowledge.

It's good, I would rate Amazon GuardDuty a seven out of ten.

Most of the time, Amazon GuardDuty is used to collect additional network login requirements, so it's basically in the compliance setting, particularly if you need to collect additional logs, or you need additional protection for your infrastructure in the cloud. Those are the areas where you can utilize Amazon GuardDuty and have it assist with compliance, as it's one of the authorized services for compliance, and it's more than likely the tool to use. For the most part, my organization uses the solution for additional protection within the cloud and also to assist with any additional login capabilities that you can't get through the other services. Amazon GuardDuty fills those gaps and helps facilitate a lot of gaps that you have.

What I like most about Amazon GuardDuty is that you can monitor your AWS accounts across, but you don't have to pay the additional cost. You can get all your CloudTrail VPC flow logs and DNS logs all in one, and then you get the monitoring with that. A lot of times, if you had a separate tool on-premise, you would have to set up your DNS logs, so usually, Amazon GuardDuty helps with all your additional networking requirements, so I utilize it for continuous monitoring because you can't detect anything if you're not monitoring, and the solution fills that gap. If you don't do anything else first, you can deploy your firewall, and then you've got your Route 53 DNS and DNSSEC, but then Amazon GuardDuty fills that, and then you have audit requirements in AU that says, "Hey, what are your additional logs?", so you can just say, "Hey, we utilize Amazon GuardDuty." You're getting your CloudTrail, your VPC flow logs, and all your DNS logs, and those are your additional logs right there, so the solution meets a lot of requirements. Now, everything comes with a cost, but I also like that the solution also provides threat response and remediation. It's a pretty good product. I've just used it more for log analysis and that's where the value is at, the niche value. Once you do threat detection, it goes into a lot of other integrations you need to implement, so threat detection is only good as the integration, as the user that knows the tools itself, and the architecture and how it's all set up and the rules that you set within that.

Improvement-wise, Amazon GuardDuty should have an overall dashboard analytics function so we could see what's in the current environment, and then in addition to that, provide best practices and recommendations, particularly to provide some type of observability, and then figure out the login side of it, based on our current environment, in terms of what we're not monitoring and what we should monitor. The solution should also give us a sample code configuration to implement that added feature or feature request.

What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon GuardDuty are more security analytics, reporting, and monitoring. They should provide recommendations and additional options that answer questions such as "Hey, what can we see in our environment?", "What should we implement within the environment?", What's recommended?"

We know that cost will always be associated with that, but Amazon GuardDuty should show us the increased costs or decreased costs if we implement it or don't implement it, and that would be a good feature request, particularly with all products within AWS, just for cloud products in general because there are times features are implemented, but once they're deployed, they don't tell you about costs that would be generated along with those features. After features are deployed, there should a summary of the costs that would be generated, and projected based on current usage, so they would give us the option to figure out how long we're going to use those features and the option to keep those on or turn those off. If more services were like that, a lot more people would use those on the cloud.

I've used Amazon GuardDuty for a year, and I've used it with other organizations as well.

Amazon GuardDuty has wonderful stability. My organization is currently using it in the production environment and it works really well. A lot of companies I know are using it, and I've been a third-party assessor before, and the companies I know implement the solution along with Cloud Trail and CloudWatch to get that observability, and then if you decide to do threat response and you want to tag an MSSP provider, all you have to do is link into Amazon GuardDuty, and that's it, you're done. The solution has its pros and cons.

Amazon GuardDuty is a scalable solution. My organization didn't have a problem with adding users. What's been challenging is doing it through infrastructure as code, but just regular added users should be straightforward and easy to do.

I haven't had to use technical support for Amazon GuardDuty yet. Maybe somebody else used it for integration help, for example, to just try to make another integration work with it, but that's about it. A lot of times it would be "Hey, I don't understand that portion of the integration", so you've got to contact support and the code was messed up because a lot of times, in one development or one product, if the codebase is changed and it's not connecting, it could be a coding issue. Eighty percent of the time, you're changing a code issue in a pipeline, a code data integration, or an issue with the API. Most of the time that's the issue.

My organization decided to go with Amazon GuardDuty because most of the infrastructure resides in AWS, so it was just a lot easier for compliance purposes to go with that to get the additional observability for the additional logs that are required.

How easy the initial setup for Amazon GuardDuty all depends on the architecture. If you're deploying this right out of the box, it's easy. A lot of times you want to implement your firewalls and more complex requirements going forward and it just depends on where you set it up in your architecture. It could be more complex if you're dealing with certain requirements, but more than likely, it's self-explanatory. Sometimes, depending on the integrations you're using with the solution, the integrations can be always complex because you're trying to implement Amazon GuardDuty logs to Qualys, for example. The complexities occur during integration and that's usually true for most products.

I had to implement Amazon GuardDuty with Qualys, and the integration was painful because Qualys didn't accept it, but Amazon was right for it, but then the other provider makes it more challenging. Utilizing and using infrastructure as code is a whole challenge itself as well, so if you do it just regular based, you'll think you're okay, and my current organization has that problem because my organization wants to implement infrastructure as code and that's great, but if you see that you're having problems with the modules, then you shouldn't use infrastructure as code, but if that's what my organization wants to do, I just let the DevOps team deal with that. As long as the solution is deployed and I can get observability of the environment, that's all that matters to me.

I don't have all the details in terms of licensing for Amazon GuardDuty, but my organization does have a license set up for it.

I use the latest and greatest version of Amazon GuardDuty that's available on the market.

The number of users of Amazon GuardDuty in my organization is between one to ten. Per my boss, it's a maximum of ten.

My advice to someone who wants to use the solution for the first time is that you've got to establish your use case. What are you going to use it for? Focus on that area, and then I would also implement a proof of concept to make sure that it's set up in your staging environment where you can do all your testing and get all your test results. Depending on what you can implement, make sure your integrations work, and the other tools you have you should also integrate with Amazon GuardDuty in your testing, so when you go to production with it, you would understand the ROI for using the tool.

A lot of times, you always want to have a centralized view of everything in your environment. What you don't want is when you have to go to this tool and then go to that tool, and it's just so much. You already have to do MFA just to get into it, and then once you're in, you'd want to see your whole environment and just get all your touchpoints, so integration is the key component to test within Amazon GuardDuty.

I would rate Amazon GuardDuty seven out of ten because some of the integrations may not work well with it, and depending on the integration that you're working with, the security tools have a lot of requirements to implement. Integration support should be a little bit easier, and it just depends on whether you're doing infrastructure as code versus doing just regular batch scripting, or a formation template. The solution has pros and cons.

My organization is a customer of Amazon GuardDuty.

We use the tool for threat detection. AWS includes AI features as well. AWS GuardDuty gives us reports. 

AWS GuardDuty needs to be more customer-oriented. 

I have been working with the tool for three years. 

The tool is stable. 

AWS GuardDuty is scalable. We used the tool bi-weekly. 

I have not contacted customer support yet. 

The tool's setup is easy. You don't need any additional learning or resources to do it. You just need to enable AWS GuardDuty. The tool's deployment got completed in two to three minutes. 

The tool has no subscription charges. 

AWS GuardDuty is automated and gives alerts whenever there is an intrusion. AWS has a SMS service and you can get notifications through it if you subscribe. We have not encountered any performance issues. I would rate the tool a nine out of ten. 

Amazon GuardDuty is an AWS Managed Service. The product finds information related to potential security risks and detects our environment related findings. It is a service that helps administrators find anomalies in their environment, rectify those issues and make the environment more secure and safe.

For example, consider some S3 buckets; we have X server access login disabled and certain configurations which are recommended that we are not following that are certain IAM user regulates such as monitoring from the background. Amazon GuardDuty will give us anomaly data for that particular IAM user, advising that certain activity was suspicious.

In our environment, the most valuable feature is discovering the anomalous sign users because we have configured single sign-on in our environment, but there are some IAM users. Since our environment is cloud-based and accessible from the internet, we like the ability to check where the user has logged in from and what kind of API calls that user is doing. Finding anything suspicious with AWS recommendations is helpful.

Amazon GuardDuty is limited to certain services. The solution has to be integrated with new services that AWS adds like QuickSight, Managed Airflow, AppFlow and MWAA. By being integrated with these services, it would be handy for users and save time.

I have been using Amazon GuardDuty for six months.

Amazon GuardDuty is service based not user-based. I can have a number of users in my system because the user management is turning the different services in AWS AIM direct access management.

We have four users of the solution. It is used by system administrators, cloud administrators, and architects. 

Amazon GuardDuty is an extra security measure. We have other security measures also implemented in our environment, such as our on-premise environment and network related securities. 

The initial setup of Amazon GuardDuty is fairly easy without much complexity.

Licensing of GuardDuty is part of the AWS license. The pricing model is pay as you go and is based on the number of events per month. When you first look at the price it seems reasonable but if you look at it holistically the cost can be improved.

At a very basic level, Amazon GuardDuty is a good tool. If you are looking for advanced security that would provide higher checks to secure their environment, this may not be enough. 

Certain checks only related to the AWS environment are good, but if you are integrated with other services like Salesforce or MuleSoft it is not a good solution.

I would rate GuardDuty a six out of 10 overall. 

I use AWS GuardDuty to monitor my AWS environment for potential security threats. It analyzes data from various sources like CloudTrail logs and VPC Flow Logs to detect malicious activity. GuardDuty provides insights into potential threats, categorizing them by severity levels, helping me prioritize and respond effectively. 

As I explore AWS GuardDuty, I find its features helpful for spotting threats in my AWS setup. With anomaly detection, active threat monitoring, and set correlation, GuardDuty alerts me to any unusual user behavior or traffic patterns right away, which is great for staying on top of potential security risks. While I'm still new to using it and haven't faced many threats yet, I see how GuardDuty is crucial for beefing up my AWS security by catching and dealing with vulnerabilities early on.

One improvement I would suggest for AWS GuardDuty is the ability to assign findings to specific users or groups, facilitating better communication and follow-up actions. It would be beneficial to have a knowledge bank where past findings and actions taken are stored, aiding in handling repeat incidents and providing historical precedence for new team members.

I have been using AWS GuardDuty for a year.

AWS GuardDuty is stable and responsive. I haven't encountered any glitches or stability issues, and the analytics are quick and reliable.

As a very small business in its initial stage, I find AWS GuardDuty to be scalable for our needs.

The tech support for AWS GuardDuty is good. The documentation and support resources available are clear and comprehensive, making it easy to set up and configure. I would rate it around nine out of ten.

Positive

GuardDuty is intuitive to use and the setup process is simple. There is not much complex configuration involved, which makes it easy to get started. Deploying AWS GuardDuty is straightforward with just a few steps, and it is all done within your AWS cloud account. As for maintenance, it is easy and there haven't been any issues or challenges.

The pricing and licensing for AWS GuardDuty are transparent and predictable, which I appreciate. While some may find it expensive at larger scales, for our small business, it is manageable and in line with expectations. AWS's pay-as-you-go model ensures we only pay for what we use, which is beneficial for budgeting.

GuardDuty helps by flagging unexpected or potentially unauthorized activity in my AWS environment. For instance, it alerts me when there is an API call from an unfamiliar IP address, which might indicate a security threat. However, in some cases, these alerts might be triggered by legitimate actions, such as employees working remotely from different locations using VPNs.

I find the anomaly detection and continuous monitoring features of AWS GuardDuty very effective. They give me peace of mind knowing that AWS is actively looking out for any abnormal behavior or traffic in my environment. In the past, for on-premises setups, I relied on different network tools for this, but in the cloud, GuardDuty takes care of it, sparing me from manual tasks like checking VPC logs. 

Integrating AWS GuardDuty with third-party tools seems straightforward, although I haven't done it yet myself. From what I have seen, getting GuardDuty data into AWS Security Hub appears to be a simple process, allowing for centralized security monitoring across multiple accounts. I'm considering enabling it and trying it out, especially since AWS offers a 30-day trial for Security Hub.

Overall, I would rate AWS GuardDuty as a ten out of ten.

We have been using AWS, and since we used a couple of tools, we decided to implement AWS GuardDuty for security purposes.

We are currently leveraging AWS GuardDuty quite often for security monitoring within our infrastructure.

I can discuss specific instances where AWS GuardDuty's automated response feature was very helpful for our security. It provides abrupt alerts, which has been a good feature.

AWS GuardDuty integrates seamlessly with third-party tools in our existing ecosystem, and we did not experience any challenges with integration.

AWS GuardDuty is currently meeting our needs concerning what could be improved.

In future updates of AWS GuardDuty, I would suggest implementing better UI features.

We have recently learned AWS GuardDuty, and we are trying to integrate it right now, as it has only been a few months.

When we deployed AWS GuardDuty, it proceeded smoothly without any difficulties or complexities.

On a scale from one to ten, I find AWS GuardDuty very stable, rating it approximately nine.

For scalability, AWS GuardDuty rates around eight on the same scale.

I have communicated with the technical support of AWS, and they are helpful and responsive.

On a scale from one to ten, I rate the technical support ten. They provided workshops and all services on time, which demonstrates their excellence.

Positive

The deployment of AWS GuardDuty required just a few hours to complete.

AWS GuardDuty has impacted our security operational costs, but we are still in the process and experimenting with it, so I'm not fully aware of the financial implications.

My team was experimenting with some tools and found AWS GuardDuty to be relatively better.

The solution can be utilized in public or private cloud environments, though I'm not fully aware of those details as my team manages the implementation.

We are not currently utilizing artificial intelligence in AWS GuardDuty to enhance its threat detection capabilities.

I would recommend AWS GuardDuty to other companies and businesses.

I rate AWS GuardDuty a nine out of ten.

My company uses AWS GuardDuty to develop the software and provide services to clients. I use the solution to monitor the service on the AWS workload or AWS instance and monitor threats or vulnerabilities.

AWS GuardDuty is easy to use and configure. I use AWS GuardDuty to check whether we are under attack or not. The solution will detect abnormalities in the AWS workload and alert us so that we can monitor and take action.

I work in a bank, and it would be good if AWS GuardDuty could be integrated with other monitoring and detection tools we use. The operation team can use a single desktop to monitor.

I have been using AWS GuardDuty for less than one month.

In my department, around seven to eight users are using AWS GuardDuty.

I previously used Google Cloud for three to four years. AWS GuardDuty has more features and can be customized more than Google Cloud.

I have heard that the solution's price is quite high. Sometimes, they need to fine-tune the service on AWS. For example, Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3) is used for static content because it is cheaper.

Overall, I rate AWS GuardDuty an eight out of ten.

We have over 1,000 employees, and we monitor their activity through AWS GuardDuty.

The solution's user interface could be improved because it will help users to understand multiple options. Currently, we have multiple options on AWS GuardDuty, which may confuse new users.

I have been using AWS GuardDuty for two years.

We faced some issues with AWS GuardDuty because sometimes we don't get proper loss from the solution.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s initial setup is not very difficult.

We have a whole bunch of information on various things in AWS GuardDuty.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.