Microsoft Defender for Cloud Reviews

We are using Defender for Cloud to check in on security and vulnerability management.

When we were switching from on-prem to the cloud, we did not have the vulnerability management tool to give us alerts on that. We were using Tenable Security Center on-prem. When we moved to the cloud, we needed a solution and chose Defender for Cloud. Now, when we do our vulnerability management meetings, we refer to Defender for Cloud recommendations. We can assign them to technicians or security personnel in case we need to change policies or make exceptions. It is set up to ensure only security personnel can dismiss a recommendation.

It lists the criticality that is the most insecure for our environment and the criticality score for it. This is helpful for us to know what we need to deal with first.

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture. 

The most valuable features are the security recommendations provided by Defender for Cloud.

Tenable Security Center has a list of all of our vulnerabilities. I can sort it by vulnerability or by machine. Defender for Cloud does do that, but it is just not as clean and easy to get to. It sometimes gets too deep in the weeds, and I do not know how I got to that point. If they had an easier way to display all the vulnerabilities of the machines affected and remediation steps on one screen rather than having to dive deep into each of them, that would be a lot easier.

There can be an easier-to-read dashboard. It would be nice to be able to see the top ten vulnerabilities that we have specific to a system on the dashboard. We can view the security score currently, but a cleaner and simpler display would be good.

I have been using Defender for Cloud for three years.

It is pretty stable and feels solid.

We have struggled with Microsoft customer service quite a bit. While experts are a ten, the overall experience is not always positive and we have had to make a complaint. When we are able to get to a call with their experts, it is great, but it can take time to get to that level. We have had to raise a ticket for the same thing about three times.

Positive

We were using Tenable Security Center on-prem. We switched because we were moving to a Microsoft-centric cloud solution.

It was easy. The setup was handled by a technician who did not report any significant issues.

We did not use any third party for deployment.

We have seen a return on investment, but I cannot quantify it.

We did not evaluate other solutions because we were only looking for a Microsoft-centric solution.

I would rate Defender for Cloud an eight out of ten.

I used Defender for Cloud in Azure Kubernetes Service and virtual machines to provide more security to these environments.

We are a financial company, so Defender for Cloud helps us create multiple layers to protect assets and ensure a more secure environment. The solution improves our efficiency. We've increased our security posture by around 30 percent. 

Defender for Cloud's most valuable features are the dashboard and alerts about issues inside virtual machines or containers. It covers a wide range of workloads. Defender provides a prioritized list of remediations that helps us improve our team's capacity. Integrating Defender for Cloud with Sentinel has increased our visibility. The solution's coordinated detection and response across devices and identities is impressive because it is complete.

I would like to see more connectors and plugins with other platforms.

I have used Defender for Cloud for three years.

The stability of the solution is good. I don't have a problem with it.

Its ability to scale is good.

I rate Microsoft support eight out of 10. Customer service is good. I deducted two points because the documentation could be clearer. 

Positive

I did not use a previous solution prior to using Defender for Cloud.

The rollout was good. It was easy.

I am a reseller. I am partnering with TD Synnex and TeleScenics.

The return on investment is high, it's about 20 percent.

I did not consider any other solutions.

I would rate Defender for Cloud an eight out of 10. 

We primarily use Microsoft Defender for Cloud for cloud security posture management.

Defender for Cloud improves our overall cloud security posture by identifying risks and vulnerabilities. It gave me a perspective on whether we comply with the industry's best practices and benchmarks we are pursuing.

My favorite part of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is the compliance features. Defender covers a wide range of workloads, on par with competing products on the market. I can get information from other cloud platforms and use Defender across AWS, Azure, GCP, containers, servers, etc. One tool provides a view across your entire hybrid environment.

Microsoft Graph needs improvement.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for around two years.

The stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is good since it sits in the Cloud, and we have not had any challenges regarding stability.

I rate Microsoft support seven out of 10. The documentation about what is covered in the basic support versus premium is unclear. 

Neutral

We use multiple products that perform similar functions in our environment, including Prisma and Wiz. We use Defender for Cloud as our native Azure tool in addition to other third-party tools.

The initial setup is relatively simple and straightforward.

No integrated reseller or custom team was used for the deployment.

We have seen a return on investment because a lot of these native tools provide better reporting, which our team can consume.

Defender's basic version is free, which is good. Many of our teams are evaluating the paid version against third-party products.

We didn't evaluate other solutions before switching as we have multiple products performing similar functionalities.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud eight out of 10. Even though there are many third-party tools with more functionality, using native tools is beneficial, and we use them alongside third-party tools.

We use Defender for Cloud for workloads that involve large amounts of data.

It's cost-effective to create custom logs in Defender for Cloud. 

Defender for Cloud provides a prioritized list of remediations for security issues, reducing risk and improving security operations.

There is room for improvement in terms of cost-effectiveness when enabling every single log, including custom logs.

I've been using Defender for Cloud for a year and a half.

I have no issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Cloud.

Scalability is great, and I would rate it a ten out of ten.

It's hard to reach someone who understands my problems. I haven't had many issues, so I haven't called them.

Positive

I used an unspecified different solution before adopting Microsoft Defender for Cloud.

The solution is really easy to enable.

I interacted with a Microsoft representative for implementation, and the process was straightforward.

The setup costs are low because it's easy to enable. However, I'm not clear on other pricing details.

I didn't evaluate other solutions extensively before choosing this.

I rate Defender for Cloud 10 out of 10.

We are using the tool for checking for vulnerabilities over my website for my own personal purpose and within my corporate role. This is also a tool that we have deployed. In terms of usage, it's much more related to reporting and vulnerability management rather than setting up from an organizational perspective.

From an efficiency perspective, it has helped with reporting and the self-service availability of security postures.

The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available. Additionally, the suggestions I get from Defender for security levels and recommendations on how to upgrade my security level are very appreciated.

I recommend that they extend the scope for legacy infra assets.

I have been working with it for more than a year now.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

There are no complaints about scalability, and I rate it an eight out of ten.

I rate customer support a nine out of ten. The support team was very responsive to queries.

Positive

Rating the setup, I would give it a six out of ten. The setup process took about two to three days due to waiting on support replies.

I had a support team to help with some of the setup aspects, and they were very responsive.

It's difficult to say because the volume of vulnerabilities and threats has increased, making it tough to compare efficiency between usage before and after implementation.

I don't have visibility into the specific costs, but it seems to be a significant concern for our organization. Every time we consider expanding usage, we carefully evaluate the necessity due to cost concerns.

I am familiar with Dataiku and Databricks, and we use SailPoint in conjunction.

Users must first understand the list of assets they have and whether there is out-of-the-box connectivity with them.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We have deployed Microsoft Defender for Cloud to identify vulnerabilities across various log sources for our client.

We implemented Defender to improve the security posture of our client's landscape.

The single pane of glass that Microsoft offers is highly crucial for several reasons. First, aggregating multiple log sources into a single pane of glass is not achievable without Microsoft Defender for Cloud. Second, we also interact with other cloud environments.

We use Defender's free CSPM functionality for the Microsoft Cloud security benchmark. The benchmark recommendations show all the vulnerabilities that help us to create a remediation plan and to take action.

It is a necessity for us that the free CSPM functionality provides multi-cloud monitoring and posture management because most of our workloads are spread across multi-clouds.

The comprehensive range of workloads protected by Defender for Cloud is sufficient for our needs, as it encompasses all essential security pillars.

We have enabled Defender for Cloud's native support for GCP. A key requirement for us before selecting Defender for Cloud was that it supported other clouds.

Defender for Cloud has aided in reducing the number of vulnerabilities and expediting the resolution process, thanks to its helpful suggestions. Consequently, we have achieved remarkable time savings of approximately 30 to 40 percent each week in comprehending and addressing vulnerabilities.

By integrating Defender for Cloud with the firewall and Defender for Endpoints, we have gained comprehensive security insights through these Microsoft integrations. This unified approach provides a single pane of glass for viewing all security information, eliminating the need to navigate between multiple portals.

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture.

The unified monitoring has saved us around 30 percent of our time.

Defender for Cloud has increased our security team's efficiency by 30 percent.

Defender for Cloud is a plug-and-play solution that provides continuous posture management once enabled.

The multi-cloud capability is an important feature of Microsoft Defender for Cloud.

The remediation process could be improved. I have seen that Google has a similar Security Center, where they not only identify vulnerabilities but also provide the steps to fix them. If Microsoft Defender for Cloud could provide remediation steps for all vulnerabilities, it would be a significant enhancement. Currently, only some vulnerabilities have remediation steps available.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for three years.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable. We have not encountered any downtime.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is scalable.

The technical support is good. We can raise tickets without any issues.

Positive

We previously utilized Google's Security Center. However, we transitioned to Microsoft Defender for Cloud following the client's preference for a native solution, as they are a Microsoft-centric organization. Additionally, Microsoft Defender for Cloud's multi-cloud capabilities, including its ability to integrate information from Google Cloud, were compelling factors in our decision.

We have achieved a return on investment in terms of time and efficiency, which translates to monetary savings. For instance, we have gained 30 percent more efficiency in remediation tasks. This means that what previously took ten days can now be completed in seven days, saving us time and, consequently, money.

I am not involved much with the pricing but the bundle offering is good.

We considered Prisma Cloud before ultimately selecting Microsoft Defender for Cloud. The fact that Defender for Cloud was a native solution for our client significantly simplified the integration process.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud nine out of ten.

We have Microsoft Defender for Cloud deployed across 2,000 locations and over 3,000 endpoints.

No maintenance is required from our end.

The primary use case for Microsoft Defender for Cloud in our organization is investigating breach or security incidents.

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture by 20 to 30 percent. With everybody moving to hybrid, it's challenging to maintain a good security posture with so many people working from home. I'm impressed with the solution's coordinated detection and responses across devices, identities, apps, emails, data, and cloud workloads. That's why we're considering using Defender in more areas and integrating it more.

I find Microsoft Defender for Cloud's KQL very flexible and powerful. It's really easy to search through with KQL queries to find the security breaches and incidents and to track down the breach itself. Microsoft Defender for Cloud presents a prioritized list of remediation for security issues, giving us a starting point to begin locking things down and tightening security.

I can't think of anything that needs improvement. It's a pretty good product.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for the last year.

Defender's stability has been flawless for us. I haven't noticed any issues.

It's great. It seems perfectly scalable.

I would rate Microsoft customer service and technical support 10 out of 10. They seem quick to respond and get us the answers we need, taking a hands-off approach to helping us integrate.

Positive

I previously used other antivirus products like Kaspersky. Microsoft Defender for Cloud is preferred because it offers cloud ability and is a more trusted partner in the industry.

We used a consultant for the implementation, and the experience was good. No complaints.

Our return on investment is seen through increased productivity. I'm able to get more done with less time.

I evaluated other antivirus products like Kaspersky before switching.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a ten. Having this solution alleviates the need to worry about other antivirus products, offering a one-stop solution.

For example, the customer wants to restrict USB connections or any output device, or they want to verify any link they open before opening it in their real environment. Mostly, they replace the current security tool they are using, such as Kaspersky, with Defender for Cloud because it integrates well with Office 365.

The biggest advantage is it centralizes management. Customers do not have to manage different vendor products. They feel confident using Microsoft because of the long-recognized technology and detailed technical documentation available online.

The valuable features include the ability to manage devices and the fact that Defender can replace other security tools like SCCM. Since they use Office 365, they need tools that work better in their organization, such as M365 Defender for Cloud.

There are challenges with the licensing policies, which are quite complicated. The documentation is difficult to understand and resellers need proper training to support customers effectively. Microsoft should provide better training for resellers.

I have been working with Defender for Cloud for more than five years.

It is quite stable. It doesn’t have significant stability issues. I would rate it an eight for stability.

I am not the one using it directly yet I haven't heard any complaints, so I would rate it a five.

Working with Microsoft technical support can be challenging. The problem-solving process can be delayed, and not all issues get resolved promptly. If there are ten tickets, maybe only five or six get resolved satisfactorily.

Neutral

Customers are replacing security tools like Kaspersky, Symantec, or Broadcom to use Defender for Cloud because it integrates seamlessly with Office 365.

The initial setup is not very easy yet it is manageable. It is not too difficult for those familiar with the product. It is a medium-complexity setup.

The implementation should be handled by the reseller. Resellers need proper training from Microsoft as the documentation is complicated.

In Vietnam, the cost structure makes it expensive. The licensing is priced publicly on the Microsoft website and it adds up based on the number of users.

The cost is expensive for the Vietnamese market. It is publicly available on the Microsoft website, and the pricing depends on the number of users.

Organizations should ensure resellers are well-trained to support the new technologies. Proper documentation and support are crucial.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.