Microsoft Defender XDR Reviews

We use Microsoft Defender XDR in our multi-tenant environment comprising Windows, Linux, and the Cloud.

We have Microsoft Defender deployed in a hybrid environment across AWS, Azure, and GCP.

Microsoft Defender XDR provides unified identity and access management. The identity protection the solution provides is good. 

If we had to use a separate solution for identity and access management I believe the performance would be clunky.

Microsoft Defender XDR extends beyond just Microsoft technologies, encompassing a wider range of platforms and services. This broad coverage is a key strength of the solution.

Since implementing Microsoft Defender XDR, the centralized view and management console have been beneficial.

Microsoft Defender XDR limits the lateral movement of advanced attacks.

It integrated seamlessly into our SIEM environment so there are no disruptions to our security operations.

The ability to adapt to evolving threats is critical as the landscape is expanding daily.

The multi-tenant management capabilities for investigating and responding to threats across tenants are good.

We are enabled us to discontinue the use of other vulnerability management tools.

The reduction in the number of vulnerability management tools we use has helped reduce manual operations.

Microsoft Defender XDR has helped reduce our costs by ten percent.

Microsoft Defender XDR has helped save our security team between five and ten percent of their time.

The unified view of the threat landscape on a central dashboard is the most valuable feature.

The naming convention keeps changing and has room for improvement.

The licensing is a nightmare and has room for improvement.

I have been using Microsoft Defender XDR for three years.

Microsoft Defender XDR is stable.

Microsoft Defender XDR is a SaaS product so it is scalable.

The technical support is good.

Positive

We previously used VMware Carbon Black and switched to Microsoft Defender for the multi-cloud environment support.

The initial deployment is straightforward. We identify the critical assets and just deploy for those initially and then slowly roll out for the rest. Around five people were involved in the deployment.

The implementation was completed in-house.

We have seen a return on investment.

I would rate Microsoft Defender XDR a nine out of ten.

We're using it for our email filtering to check incoming emails and URLs. We're also using it for vulnerability management to see the status of our assets that are registered on the system. We also check it to see what kinds of threats and campaigns are currently being launched via emails.

It provides us with better insight into what's going on across our platform. It has also given us a very easy way to respond when threats or alerts come through. And when looking for someone in particular, it helps with that. It hugely improved our insight into what's going on inside the company's premises and environments.

365 Defender also helps find high-value alerts, but we haven't used it for complete automation. It has some automation features where it can try to block or quarantine things, but beyond the default automation configuration, we haven't explored deeper into using automation. The default settings work well.

And while we've always used one or two dashboards, this system has made it easier to have a quick overview on a single platform.

In addition, the threat intelligence helps prepare you for potential threats, to a certain limit, because it gives you insights into where your shortcomings are, your vulnerabilities. It also gives you some security recommendations to make improvements.

And the solution has decreased our time to respond because on high alerts you can get a quick response. The system will notify you very quickly if it detects something at a certain thread level or a custom threat level that you set.

Microsoft 365 Defender has a very great interface to help protect registered devices when it comes to web protection, which is very handy.

We also use the alert systems often. It's a great threat intelligence source for us, providing alerts for things it detects on the network and on the machines. We've used it often when there is a potential incident to see what was done on a computer. That works quite nicely because you can see everything that the user has done, including websites accessed, et cetera. And if something was on the machine, we can see what it was trying to do.

I use the alert system on a daily basis. It gives you a very good analysis of where something was found, which employee or which device. And it often gives you a good history on that. The alerts help me to monitor and check what is going on. That's a very valuable system to have.

We've also tried the attack simulation, which sends out phishing emails internally as a test to see how the users respond. We get feedback and use the training simulation as a result. We've only done that once, and it's something we want to work on a little more.

In addition, we're using the assets on the system as well as the inventory functionality. It checks all the machines to see what software is installed on them.

We've used a lot of the features on the cloud, although not everything to its full potential, but we've used 70 to 80 percent of all the features on the cloud.

In the beginning, it's difficult to navigate the system because it is quite large. Just trying to find your way and understand how the system works can be hard. After spending quite a lot of time searching it's a lot easier, but I wish it were a bit more user-friendly when you're trying to find things.

The information it provides is great, but for a newcomer, it is quite tedious and takes a long time to load. Here in South Africa, when you click, oftentimes you have to wait quite some time before you get to the next page. It's not necessarily internet-related. I think it's just that the service is a bit slow.

Also, while the solution does help to prioritize threats, unfortunately, it doesn't do so for the entire environment. The reason is that it only supports full integration from Windows 10 and up. It provides you certain information from your server environment, but when you start going with legacy services, it is a bit lacking.

Another issue that is sometimes a headache is that they constantly make changes. Things will be merged, they will get different names, or be moved around. Things will be added and other things go somewhere else. They do a lot of development to make the product better, but it's very frustrating having to search for stuff after they've moved it, because you don't always know that they have moved things. They might have little banners, but if you're just working and don't read them, you don't know where things have gone. 

I would also really like to see better integration with the server platforms for managing your server environment. That's something it currently doesn't do. For all the server environments, you either need to make use of group policies or SCCM to manage that independently. It can provide you information on the system, but it doesn't have control over your server line.

Also, I make use of 365 Defender on a business level and on a personal level. On the personal level, there is a lot less functionality. Something that would be very nice is that, for the level you are on, you would only see the product you are subscribed to. For instance, if you log on via the business, you have all your action areas, anything you can do and see, on the left. Because you're using it at a corporate level, you can see and do everything. On the personal level, or in a small business where you're only using some of the features, you still have all the same options, but when you click on them, it tells you that you need to upgrade or subscribe. They should only show you what you have access to, and not all the tabs and then say, "You need to subscribe to get access to this." It just clutters the whole area.

We have been using Microsoft 365 Defender for about two years.

Overall, it has 95 percent stability. We don't have any issues with it. It works well. Microsoft does provide frequent information when there are issues or delays. But the stability is very good.

We're still learning a lot about its capabilities. It's more capable than what we use it for. That is due to a restriction on our resources and availability to get to know the system even better.

We have contacted Microsoft tech support multiple times. They are quick to respond to the original request. Sometimes I have been quite surprised because they have replied within 15 minutes. Some of the questions we had were resolved quickly, on the order of 60 minutes. I had one that took almost two years to get resolved. But in general, they are quick to respond. Their support is very good and quick.

Positive

Before 365 Defender, we made use of Avast as our antivirus, which had its own web console. For malware protection, we used an on-prem Cisco IronPort system that was scanning all our emails. And most of our SIEM logging information was done manually. We had much less insight into what was going on in the company.

Because it was a new solution for us, we had a company that works with Microsoft assist us, to make sure that all the configurations were standard. But since then, we've maintained most of it ourselves. On our side there were no more than five people involved.

It's a very expensive product, but for any threat it has definitely stopped or protected us from, in that sense, it has saved money and time, by preventing things that could have happened. But is it affordable? No, it's expensive.

If you look at everything that the solution entails, and the big cost to companies, especially medium-sized companies, one would like to have a bit of a price decrease due to economic circumstances. The functionality is fantastic, but for medium and small-sized companies it's overpriced. It would be better if it were a little bit cheaper.

We did look at other solutions. In the end, we decided on 365 Defender because it was all integrated. It worked to our advantage because all the products that we needed were already on the machines. All the products that you get from the Defender area are part of the built-in Windows 10 features. It gave us a better way of controlling and managing things. Overall, it made more sense to have one central place to manage and control and be alerted.

My advice is don't be frightened when you start getting into the solution. If you are not used to the environment, it is a mouthful, and it can really scare your socks off. There's just so much to it that you won't really know where to start.

The best thing I can recommend to anybody who is starting is to get somebody who knows the system to give you a walkthrough. Also, look at the tutorials to see what the functionalities are. It will be beneficial for any person to get a good overview of what's going on in 365 Defender, the capabilities and how it looks. But getting in contact with somebody who has some experience already in using it will help you to ask where to find things. "Where do I go from here? Show me how you're set up, so I can at least see some of the functionalities."

My very first impression of 365 Defender was that I was looking for something, but I didn't even know where to start. It was too overwhelming. As I spoke to other people who knew about the system, they gave me an overview and that made it easier for me to understand and to know where to go.

365 Defender is our main deployment, but we've got the endpoints also connected on Intune. They work together to deliver coordinated detection and response in our environment. Our complete suite is pretty much all Microsoft. Our environment is a 50/50 hybrid. We use Intune for certain policy changes and some of the deployments. But because our environment has a lot of legacy systems, we make use of the normal, on-prem deployment services as well.

Sentinel is linked to our on-premises Active Directory. It helps identify things that are happening on-prem. For example, when a user's account instance gets locked out, it will show you, on Defender, from which local machine it was locked out. Or if certain things are accessed, it will show that information on the on-prem Active Directory. It works well. For investigating and responding to threats, it definitely helps by dumping the information in a centralized location with the alerts to identify a bit more flow pattern. If something happens that's not on the cloud area, but it's on-prem, it helps track and identify movement. The information from Sentinel is an added bonus.

Overall, Defender 365 has saved us time, compared to the old ways of doing things, but at the same time, I wish the site was faster. Sometimes it can be very slow.

Best-of-breed solutions versus a single vendor's suite comes down to personal experience. With best-of-breed, at least you know that they have been tested in the industry and have a lot of history behind them. Also, the redundancy would be a lot better. Going with a single vendor sometimes makes it a little bit difficult, especially if they are only focusing on one area. It's a difficult question. It might come down to the way someone was "brought up" in the security industry or the way that they trust these companies.

I give Microsoft 365 Defender a nine out of 10. Once you get to know the system, it's really awesome. It provides a lot of insights.

I'm a Security and Compliance consultant providing 365 Defender as a security solution for my clients.

All our solutions are Microsoft 365 products, including security, identity, etc., so we have better protection from advanced cyber attacks. It's also easier to ensure compliance with data regulations through the Microsoft Purview portal, which has templates for various regulations on medical privacy and personal data.

365 Defender helps us automate routine tasks and prioritize high-value alerts. Automation allows us to use time more efficiently. It makes functions easier by consolidating data from multiple Microsoft portals into a single dashboard. You can customize the playbook however you like and get a centralized view of the various components.  

The Threat Explorer feature helps us understand emerging threats in real-time and take steps to safeguard our environment. 365 Defenders saves us money because it's a bundle. If you purchased each of these solutions as a standalone product, it would cost you more than $60 per user per month, but you get them for $12 a month in a package. 

365 improved our detection and response times because we catch issues earlier in the chain of events. All the components of 365 Defender work together to provide instant detection. 

The most valuable feature depends on the scenario. For compliance, I like Microsoft Purview Information Protection and Data Loss Prevention. Sentinel is the most helpful feature for security. 365 Defender helps us prioritize threats across an enterprise. It's a crucial feature for the managed services team. 

I also have Defender for Cloud Apps and Defender for Office. Integrating other Microsoft solutions with 365 Defender is seamless. Microsoft has better documentation than some other solutions. I also work on AWS, but I feel more comfortable with Azure. There are some limitations with a standalone license, but integrating Microsoft products is a seamless experience that produces insightful analytics.

Sentinel enables us to ingest data from our ecosystem, giving us a complete picture of the entities associated with an incident. Those analytics are pretty helpful. We develop playbooks customized for any executive or developer-based summary. It depends on what we want to show and our creativity. 

365 Defender has multiple subsets, including Defender for Cloud Apps. When integrating Defender for Cloud Apps with apps on third-party cloud platforms like AWS or GCP, there are limitations on our ability to control user activities. If Microsoft added more control over third-party products, that would be a game-changer and help us quite a lot.

I have used 365 Defender for five years.

365 Defender is stable.

365 Defender is scalable. It's easy to create and manage groups, set policies, and add users. 

I rate 365 Defender support a seven out of ten. When I raise a ticket, I'm usually redirected to a third-party vendor like Convergence. I would prefer it if Microsoft India handled our tickets instead. That would be helpful. The third-party vendor sometimes doesn't have comprehensive knowledge of the product. 

Neutral

The deployment varies from client to client. Our implementation strategy is based on the client's business requirements and the RFP. You need at least two people to deploy 365 Defender, but you might need more support staff for larger jobs. 

It all depends on how a client wants to proceed, but we typically perform an audit before consulting to identify missing components or security controls. For example, if the client requires HIPAA compliance, we must control the data about specific patients. After following up on everything, we recommend the appropriate Microsoft product, and each has a separate timeline. 

I'm on the consulting side, so once we are done with the implementation, a managed services team takes over the maintenance on an SLA of one to three years. 

The price of 365 Defender is reasonable. 

I rate Microsoft 365 Defender a ten out of ten. Microsoft is a one-stop solution, and it has an answer for any problem you're facing. Before implementing 365 Defender, you should be clear about the problem you want to solve. Hiring a consultant can help, but typically, my clients know maybe three out of the five things they should know. 

The main use case has been for threat hunting, not in the sense of actively looking for the threat, but in terms of analyzing the ongoing process within clients' machines. I was looking into what kind of changes happen when you install any new software and it asks for so many permissions. I wanted to analyze the criticality of the permissions being asked and so on. Usually, when we install any software, we just click next, next, and next. We don't look at the details. So, my role was to check how it behaves within a system. For that reason, I used Microsoft Defender. 

I used the query language to do advanced threat hunting. I ran different queries to collect the data. The data was then brought into Power BI. We had data coming from different channels. So, we used Power BI to collect it at a single point.

My usage of it was on a very small scale. I am not aware of its overall impact on the organization, but it did help us a lot to know and achieve what we wanted to achieve. Without Microsoft 365 Defender, the detection for our use case would have been impossible.

It provided more visibility into threats, and it came with some of the default functions from Microsoft, which was an advantage. They had already defined different tables in advanced threat hunting, which was very helpful. I am not aware of other vendors providing that.

Its threat intelligence helped to prepare for potential threats before they hit and to take proactive steps. That was my target for that project. We were actively looking for vulnerabilities inside the software, and we wanted to detect the software supply chain aspect. That was a difficult task, but we wanted to be ahead before any attack happened. That's why we were using Microsoft 365 Defender.

It saved time. They had already defined different tables to identify different artifacts within the system, which saved about 50% of our time.

Within advanced threat hunting, the tables that have already been defined by Microsoft are helpful. In the advanced threat hunting tab, there were different tables, and one of the tables was related to device info, device alert, and device events. That was very helpful. Another feature that I liked but didn't have access to was deep analysis.

I liked its portal a lot. I am currently using a different vendor, and there is a big difference between them. Microsoft had a very good portal, and its user interface was good. Irrespective of where I was, with a click, I could see comprehensive details about something on the right side. The related information was always on the right side. So, I didn't have to jump over different tabs and functionalities. The information was always there on the right side, which is something I liked in Microsoft 365 Defender portal.

The documentation on their website is somewhat outdated and doesn't show properly. I wanted to try a query in Microsoft Defender 365. When I opened the related documentation from the security blog on the Microsoft website, the figures were not showing. It was difficult to understand the article without having the figures. The figures were there in the article, but they were not getting loaded, which made the article obsolete. They should refresh all their articles and see that the steps and figures aren't missing. They can also provide more documentation.

I used it just for four months in a previous company.

I never had any problems with it. It was always stable.

It's scalable. You can query each and every machine in the company.

I was working for a client, and that client had more than 50,000 people.

I never contacted them directly, but based on what I heard during the meetings, they seemed to be quite helpful and good.

I didn't use any other similar solution before Microsoft 365 Defender. That was the first time I used Microsoft 365 Defender. That was my first experience. Now, I'm using a different product, and I can see that Microsoft 365 Defender was much better than the current product.

Microsoft 365 Defender is very good for analyzing something. There are multiple types of data and multiple ways to utilize that data. With a single click, you can have all the related data for a particular topic. That's really good, and that is what I'm missing in the current product.

I did not use Microsoft Defender for Cloud, but I saw the cloud part for monitoring cloud applications. It was nice, and it had some added functionalities. For example, application risk scoring was very good. It shows what data has been considered to give a particular risk score, which is useful for a new learner like me. It was helpful to know the criteria for scoring. They also included so many applications. There were more than 24,000 cloud applications inside their catalog. That's a really good catalog.

To a security colleague who says it’s better to go with a best-of-breed strategy rather than a single vendor’s security suite, I would agree that multiple vendors are better than a single vendor because every vendor has different capabilities. It's always better to use the best products from different vendors than to use all the products from the same vendor.

I would rate Microsoft 365 Defender a nine out of ten. 

We are a managed security service provider, and we use Microsoft 365 Defender to provide EDR and endpoint, and email protection to our customers.

Microsoft 365 Defender has great threat analytics integration. It has visibility into threat incidents that occur across different organizations, and this is directly integrated into the tool. Rather than checking for indicators that are available online, we can directly look at which endpoint or user has been impacted in the organization, and this makes our job easier.

Another valuable feature is vulnerability management. The inbuilt vulnerability management service automatically scans devices for vulnerabilities and separates them as critical and non-critical. We don't need to have a separate vulnerability assessment device.

In terms of prioritizing threats, we have come across vulnerabilities and threats that are present in our customers' environments and have been able to discover the devices that are vulnerable to particular attacks. We have then been able to immediately inform our customers and help them update to the latest version of the particular software that was vulnerable. There are automatic response actions in the tool so that a threat can be remediated within the tool itself.

I also like the lab devices that are available within the tool itself with which we can do all the tests. We can simulate some threat activities in these lab devices that are provided by Microsoft and don't need to prepare a separate device to validate it or to simulate a threat tag duty.

The threat intel integration provides great visibility into threats. Microsoft has a huge team that handles threat intel research, and their findings are integrated with their tools like Defender or Sentinel. The features within the tool itself work very well. There's an automatic threat handling module available in the tool, and there are lots of threat handling queries specific to different attack campaigns. We can run those queries to know if any IOCs related to those are present in the devices. Also, there are several inbuilt analytics rules available.

We have integrated Microsoft Sentinel and Office 365, and Defender and Sentinel as well. Some, like Office 365, are natively integrated, and there are connectors available for those that are not. It is easy to integrate the solutions. For example, to integrate Defender and Sentinel we just deployed a connector. There was a short latency period, but other than that, it was seamless.

The automatic investigation and remediation (AIR) feature helps to automatically investigate and terminate many of the malicious files. Without this feature, we would have the difficult task of going to each and every endpoint to delete a particular file or prevent execution.

Microsoft 365 Defender has eliminated the need to look at multiple dashboards and has given us one XDR dashboard. We have a wider range of visibility from a single pane of glass, which also makes it easier to manage.

Regarding saving time, the key has been the fact that everything can be managed from a single pane of glass where we have visibility into all of the endpoints and users. Previously, we had to look into each device belonging to the customer before deploying a solution. Automatic remediation and vulnerability management features have saved us a lot of time. The time-savings have resulted in saving us money as well.

Offboarding latency should be reduced. Even after a device has been successfully offboarded using a particular offboarding script, it still shows up as onboarded.

Licensing is also confusing, particularly with regard to Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

A good feature to add would be automatic patch deployment. Currently, the vulnerability management feature shows all of the vulnerabilities present in different devices that have been onboarded. It shows what manual actions can be taken or what patches can be deployed, but automatic patch deployment is not an option. It would be great if a patch can also be deployed right from the tool.

I've been using Microsoft 365 Defender for 1.5 years.

Other than a few times where we faced issues with hanging, the solution has mostly been stable.

It's a very scalable tool that can be used in a very small environment or in a very large environment. Everything can be managed from a simple dashboard and can be scaled up or down depending on the customer's environment.

We have had to rely on technical support quite a few times, and they have been very responsive. I'd rate technical support at nine out of ten.

Positive

Because it's a cloud solution, Microsoft 365 Defender is easy to deploy.

I prefer to go with a best-of-breed strategy rather than with a single vendor's security suite, but the tool would need to integrate with as many products as possible, as in an open XDR strategy. However, if you can't integrate with multiple devices by having an open XDR tool, it's best to have a single vendor's tool in order to have greater integration.

If you are looking into Microsoft 365 Defender, my advice would be to make sure that you know your licensing requirements. If you already have a Microsoft-based environment, then this solution may be a good fit as it will integrate with all other Microsoft products. Also, Microsoft is constantly improving their solutions, and it's a good time to be in the Microsoft security sphere.

Overall, I'd rate Microsoft 365 Defender at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We are using Microsoft Defender XDR for our endpoint, desktop, and laptop protection.

Microsoft Defender can extend its protection to the third-party applications we use, which is helpful.

Microsoft Defender XDR not only helps stop malware attacks but also offers advanced attack prevention features to safeguard against sophisticated threats.

Our environment is multi-tenant, and Microsoft Defender XDR offers seamless integration. Its ability to respond to threats across the multi-tenants is good.

It helps our security team by automating tasks, providing detailed reports, safeguarding our systems, and enabling historical analysis.

It has helped to reduce some of our costs by almost $10,000 per month.

Microsoft Defender XDR is easy to manage, saving our security team time.

Scanning, vulnerability reporting, and the dashboard are the most valuable features.

While the XDR platform offers valuable functionalities, it falls short of other solutions in its ability to deliver a cohesive identity experience. To address this limitation, integrating MDR as part of the XDR experience and incorporating the latest advancements into Microsoft Defender XDR are crucial steps.

I have been using Microsoft Defender XDR for over three years.

Microsoft Defender XDR is stable.

We can scale up with Microsoft Defender XDR with no problems.

We have a dedicated account manager who handles our support requests. We submit our requests through a ticketing system, and they respond promptly.

Positive

We also use CrowdStrike. Both have advanced capabilities and are easy to manage. We have them integrated with multiple tenants but for different products. 

The initial deployment was straightforward and took one to two days to complete.

While Microsoft Defender XDR carries a higher cost, its ease of use compared to Defender may justify the investment.

Although I would rate Microsoft Defender XDR eight out of ten, its visibility suffers when used with third-party applications and non-Azure cloud platforms.

While the implementation itself is straightforward, troubleshooting, log creation, and monitoring can be challenging. This solution may be suitable for Microsoft-centric environments, but its visibility suffers in scenarios with multiple third-party solutions or hybrid deployments.

We primarily use it for endpoint security. Specifically, it serves as our solution for antivirus detection, malware detection, and related aspects focused on safeguarding individual devices. 

Its single-pane interface is a time-saving feature, as it eliminates the need to check different locations which is excellent for efficiency. It allows us to phase out the use of other security products. For example, we previously ran Sophos on-premises. However, upon transitioning to Microsoft 365 and leveraging the included Defender, we discontinued the use of Sophos. This shift not only streamlined our security approach with a unified solution but also contributed to cost savings, as everything is encompassed within the same license—a concept that aligns with the efficiency of a single-pane interface.

The most valuable aspect is that it comes included with the licensing, which is excellent. It provides a single pane of glass within the 365 admin interface, streamlining our experience by consolidating information in one place and eliminating the need to navigate through multiple interfaces.

It would be highly beneficial if CoPilot could identify anomalies within the network and notify the IT team. For instance, if a user typically accesses around a hundred megabytes of data daily from familiar files and locations but suddenly diverges to an uncommon destination, uploading ten gigabytes of data to an unfamiliar website, that would be a significant anomaly. Pausing such activity and alerting the IT team for a human assessment would be a valuable feature to ensure security.

I have been working with it for three years.

No stability issues noted, and there haven't been any concerns regarding false positives. Overall, the experience has been positive.

Scalability is straightforward; no issues are encountered. We predominantly use Windows 10, and so far, I haven't observed any issues. Some of us have transitioned to Windows 11, and it appears to function well.

We haven't contacted their tech support, which I consider a positive indicator.

In terms of ROI, our expectation is to gain a comprehensive analytical perspective by upgrading to E5, activating Sentinel, and deploying other products like Entra. This move aims to provide a more extensive understanding of user activities, login details, and other relevant metrics. Currently on a three-year Microsoft term set to end on April 1st, we've inquired with our vendor about transitioning from E3 to E5 immediately.

In our security solution evaluation, we considered Trend Micro and Sophos, focusing more on Sophos due to its cloud version. However, challenges in patching the on-premises Sophos led us to choose Microsoft Defender. The simplicity, inclusion in our package and regular patching made Defender more attractive. Additionally, our decision was influenced by community adoption, as no other law enforcement agencies in Canada were using Trend Micro. Defender's seamless integration and zero additional cost aligned with our strategy of opting for solutions without extra expenses.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

We implemented Defender two and a half years ago, utilizing it in a passive mode with only the sensor active for data collection and basic EDR results. Although it has been running on all devices, we are currently in the process of making the final transition from the existing setup to fully leverage Defender as our EDR solution.

We utilize analytics on both iOS and Android platforms, and it holds significant importance for us. Compliance with mandates, often stemming from executive orders, requires meeting specific contract requirements. In response, we employ analytics to implement and maintain controls consistently across various device types. The capability to adapt to emerging threats is of utmost importance to us. We lack the time and resources to constantly learn about new indicators and threat actors. We expect that the threat intelligence from Microsoft and other providers seamlessly integrates into the system, enabling automatic updates based on the current global threat landscape. The unified single pane of glass is a significant benefit. It consolidates everything into one interface, eliminating the need to navigate through multiple portals for information.

The greatest value lies in integration, I believe. The ability to integrate and observe a more cohesive narrative across the products is crucial.

There are still some components, such as vulnerability management within the vendor product, where improved integration would be beneficial. Currently, it's not visible in the same interface, requiring us to search elsewhere to access that information. While it has streamlined data collection and retrieval, there's still room for improvement in terms of user-friendliness for certain individuals. While the ultimate goal is to enhance security, there's room for improvement in terms of pricing.

We are currently in the migration process from Sophos to Microsoft Defender.

It offers high stability.

The backend infrastructure and structure in place seem to be easily scalable to meet our requirements.

Customer service and technical support vary. Opening support cases for different components within the security stack or Microsoft entity often reveals that first-level support is lacking. It typically takes two or three weeks to get an escalation, and by then, the issue may have resolved itself. Escalations are challenging, as first-level support struggles to comprehend the problem, leading to repetitive discussions. I would rate it four out of ten.

Neutral

We transitioned from Sophos to Microsoft Defender primarily due to cost reduction and the elimination of duplicated technologies.

The initial setup used to be complex, but now it's much more streamlined.

We follow a phased approach for deployment, beginning with a proof of concept pilot. However, our main deployment cycle revolves around Defender, facilitated via Intune, where all devices are managed. Building the package and incorporating scripts into Intune is the key process for the sequential implementation, which has evolved over time. Maintenance involves keeping pace with changes, not just patching. Microsoft has significantly improved patch cycle management, but dealing with the constant stream of changes they introduce remains a challenge.

It proved to be effective in cost savings. Our return on investment is tied to the existing investment in the current SKU. We anticipate not only recouping the dollars spent but also gaining the advantage of a unified interface, a single pane of glass. This consolidation allows us to streamline our operations, saving valuable time and effectively reclaiming productivity that would otherwise be spent navigating between different platforms on a daily basis.

When seeking a security suite, even with an E5 enterprise license, additional purchases are still necessary. The license cost for a year is approximately forty-four thousand, and this annual saving is a significant factor in our decision to switch.

In the past, we explored alternatives such as Carbon Black and Cylance, particularly for their machine learning and AI components, which were quite innovative at that time, approximately three years ago. However, our approach has evolved, and we've shifted significantly towards the Microsoft Stack. The decision is influenced by our existing environment, where we can readily assess the capabilities available within Microsoft.

The critical aspect is comprehending your existing setup. During our migration, we opt for a like-for-like transition instead of going for something entirely new, as the latter could be disruptive to some processes. Defender offers extensive capabilities, but understanding where to begin is crucial to avoiding disruption. Start with a like-for-like migration and plan the subsequent ramp-up to align with its capabilities. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.