Microsoft Defender XDR Reviews

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.

I primarily use the solution as an engineer. I use the product to protect the endpoint and I use it to protect my customer's environment. 

The web protection on offer is very good. For a company that doesn't have a firewall, it's quite useful.

It gives feedback and helps protect internet access. It provides you with analysis on the state of the environment and you have a direct link to Microsoft which is doing its own research on security. You're constantly getting feedback from Microsoft resources so that you can be up to date in your own environment and you'll have a better understanding of the security landscape. 

The solution is great for companies on a budget.

Defender provides helpful visibility into threats. It covers a lot and comes with a next-gen antivirus. With that, you can register to the cloud, and, if you have cloud protection, your environment is protected even more. 

It helps us prioritize the threats across our enterprise. It covers all of our devices. You can cover your entire operation with the license you purchase.

Microsoft 365 Defender is easy to integrate with other products. You just have to configure some things in order to integrate everything and you are SDR compliant. We currently have it integrated natively, so we don't have to worry about configurations.

The comprehensiveness of Microsoft's threat detection is good. Microsoft provides a lot of security. It gives you visibility and IT has a lot of control over everything. You can see your environment, including clouds. You can block things within your environment as needed. The applications are easy to manage. It also has app governance to be able to gain visibility into permissions.

The product has helped automate routine tasks and the finding of high-value alerts. It has an automatic investigation feature that you can enable. It's great for automation. Thanks to automation, it has helped reduce the time it takes to analyze security events and alerts. You don't have to wait to take action. If there is a threat, you can neutralize it faster and it will record everything for audit records. While I know it has saved us time, I can't quantify that into a specific amount of hours.

We no longer need to look at multiple dashboards. Now, everything is centralized under one dashboard. 

The product's threat intelligence helps us prepare for potential threats and take proactive steps. Since we've been using it, we've had no security incidents.

The only issue I've had is, when it comes to deployment, the steps I must take around policy setup. That is challenging. We're working on the onboarding and configuration policies. We're collecting feedback from customers and partners in hopes of refining the future design for deployment.

I've used the solution for about two years.

The feedback I have received from customers is that the stability is very good. 

The product scales well.

If you have a license through a partner, it's the partner that will support you.

The only issue with Microsoft is the response times. They are very competent, however, sometimes you will send an email and get no response. 

Neutral

I previously used Sophos. I then switched to Microsoft Defender. The Sophos deployment is quite easy in comparison. You can do everything from a single portal. They had already achieved effective centralization. 

Right now, there are two different ways to onboard. You might have to have a different partner to configure policies. However, right now, you can also create policies from the activity center, so you don't have to do it from the device itself.

How long a deployment takes depends on your scope and the number of devices you are covering. 

If you do not get a license for the portal, you'll have to use the manual to deploy. If you have an older server you may encounter some issues. However, if you upgrade the server at the same time, you'll have fewer problems.

We do use more than one Microsoft security product. We've integrated with other products. 

I do not make use of the directional sync capabilities at this time. I'm also not using Microsoft Sentinel.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If the deployment of the agent was better, I'd move my grade closer to ten. It should be more automatic. You also shouldn't have to install the logs. 

We mainly use it to defend endpoints.

We have seen fewer threats with the solution. The attacks that we experienced in prior years have reduced drastically since we implemented Defender.

We also use Microsoft Defender for Identity. Their integration is very good. If you are a Microsoft 365 SaaS solution user, it is perfect. It works very well with all the services provided by Microsoft. These services work natively together to deliver coordinated detection and response across our environment. We are pretty much a Microsoft shop, so the integration of these different services is very important for us to secure our offices.

Microsoft 365 Defender's threat protection is very comprehensive. The service that is available now is much more comprehensive than what was available a few years back. The only area that I see lacking is the dashboard. I can create my own dashboard, but the preset security dashboards should be much more functional.

Its threat intelligence helps prepare us for potential threats and take proactive steps before the threats hit. The vulnerability scanning feature is great, and the Secure Score feature that scans the endpoints for vulnerabilities and keeps them up to date reduces a lot of the attacks that can possibly happen.

Microsoft 365 Defender has saved us time. It has saved at least 30% to 40% of our time.

Microsoft 365 Defender has saved us costs. Previously, we had to pay for third-party protection services separately, but because it is now integrated with our E5 licenses, it saves us a lot of money.

Microsoft 365 Defender has decreased our time to detect and respond. We now have visibility and this led to about a 20% to 30% reduction. 

The EDR and the way it automatically responds to ransomware and other attacks are valuable features.

The visibility into threats is not as good as other products in the market such as CrowdStrike, but if you know where to look, you can gain access to what is going on. The way the dashboard is designed is not as great as other products.

It helps to prioritize threats across the enterprise, but a lot of administrative overload is involved in determining which threats to prioritize. As compared to other products, it is a bit lacking.

Similarly, it helps to automate routine tasks and finds high-value alerts, but a little bit more automation would be appreciated.

Automated playbooks and automated dashboards would be preferable to the way the data is currently being presented. That is because a lot of organizations that I have worked with over the past years do not have full-on SOC or threat detection services. They should put in more automated response capabilities and dashboards for smaller organizations.

I have been using this solution for almost three years.

It is a very stable product. Our attack metrics have come down drastically since we integrated with Defender. In my opinion, it is a very stable product.

It is very scalable. I do not know about third-party clouds or third-party solutions, but when you are a Microsoft shop or have Azure or a hybrid setup, it is very scalable.

We have multiple departments and multiple locations. We have client-facing computers, and we have in-house and on-prem computers. We also have Azure VMs. 

Their support can be better. Their response time is good, but their knowledge and documentation are a bit lacking. Technology is moving faster than the documentation and the knowledge that is being provided to the support team. Their support team pretty much looks at the same documentation that we are looking at, but the technology is moving a lot faster than they can catch up. I would rate their support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

We used CrowdStrike and Trend Micro. We switched to Microsoft 365 Defender because we wanted to integrate services.

The solution is deployed on the cloud, but the endpoints are connected on-prem. In our organization, we have quite a few endpoints, so it took about three or four weeks.

The setup will be straightforward for big organizations if they have a complete IT department, but for a small organization, implementing the same service becomes trickier because they do not have full-fledged IT departments. That is where the problem lies. 

More automation would be better. However, automation is present with Autopilot and other services where you can integrate everything.

In terms of maintenance, you have to fine-tune the services on a regular basis and tweak the deployment as per your requirements.

We have about eight admins who worked on the implementation of the solution.

We have probably seen 30% to 40% ROI.

It is fairly priced because we get complete integrated services with the E5 license.

To a security colleague who says it is better to go with a best-of-breed strategy rather than a single vendor’s security suite, I would say that a single-vendor strategy worked for us because it brought down our investment in terms of licensing and cost. The deployment across the organization has been a lot easier than integrating third-party solutions in different areas of the organization. For example, Defender integrates very well with both the endpoints and the cloud. Whereas with a third-party solution, we have to get different applications that need to connect back to the service to get the solutions that we require. Native integration is very useful for us when it comes to Microsoft. That is what I would recommend.

If you are a Microsoft shop, I would highly recommend it, but you have to do a PoC.

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

We primarily use the solution for email protection to scan incoming emails and attack simulation. Attack simulation allows our users to practice detecting phishing emails without any risk. The product also gives us an overview of our security situation. 

We operate a hybrid environment with a wide variety of users around the world. 

We use multiple Microsoft security products, including Defender for Endpoint, Sentinel, and Defender for Cloud Apps.  

We have integrated all our Microsoft security solutions, and the integration is easy and seamless, though an Azure account is required to connect Sentinel with other products. 

The solutions work natively together to deliver coordinated detection and response across our environment.  

The multiple Microsoft security products provide comprehensive threat protection, especially by combining 365 Defender and Defender for Cloud Apps, Endpoint, and Identity.  

The solution allows us to remediate threats better, and the Microsoft Secure Score tells us where we need to improve the security of our organization.

365 Defender saves us time in the region of 10%.

With security products, it can be hard to determine how much money they save us by protecting us from attacks, but I would say our cost savings are around 15%. 

The tool decreased our time to detect and respond, as we can quickly navigate to the required dashboard to get on top of unfolding threats. It reduced the time by 5% for each.  

The attack simulation is excellent; initially, this feature wasn't very robust, but Microsoft improved what we could achieve with it. We can now customize our practice phishing emails and include our company logo, for example. Attack simulation also helps integrate with third-party solutions where applicable and provides an overview of our security architecture through testing. The summary includes areas for improvement in our protection and what steps we need to take to get there.

365 Defender works seamlessly with other Microsoft products like Defender for Endpoint, and once we've onboarded a device, it's easy to see the entire progression of a malicious email. This includes the IP origin, and these are some of the things I love about the product.

The solution provides us with excellent visibility into threats; there are various features that clearly show when our organization is under attack, which country the attack originates from, and what we need to do to mitigate it. 

365 Defender prioritizes threats across the enterprise, which is essential because it gives us an overview of what we need to do to improve our security. We don't need to think of what we must do which is significant for us. 

The solution's threat intelligence helps us prepare for potential threats and take proactive steps before they hit. Over time, the threat intelligence learns and gets better, much like an AI.  

A simple dashboard without having to use MS Sentinel would be a welcome improvement. 

We sometimes get false alerts, and Microsoft told us the issue was with them and that they were aware of it. They were supposed to remediate it, but we had to do much ourselves. The false positives need to be reduced. 

We've been using 365 Defender for four years. 

The stability isn't bad, but we get too many false positives.

Microsoft has been able to scale up the solution over time, so it's scalable. All we need to do is purchase licenses according to our requirements. We have around 1,000 users.

The customer support is good, but there is room for improvement. 

Neutral

The deployment was straightforward and quick; it took minutes. Onboarding the other solutions can take a little longer, depending on the environment and migration methods.

The setup can be done by one or two staff. In a scenario with many thousands of users and a proficient security admin, the deployment could be done in 15 to 20 minutes. The solution doesn't require any maintenance on our end, as it's cloud-based. 

The product gives us an ROI as it protects our organization from potentially costly attacks. Our ROI is around 5%.

The product is fairly priced for what we get from it. 

I rate the solution seven out of ten. 

We use MS Sentinel, but I wouldn't say it ingests data from our entire ecosystem. It's straightforward to integrate, but getting the most out of Sentinel requires a lot of configuration, which needs significant expertise and time.

Sentinel enables us to investigate threats and respond holistically from one place, and that's important for us. The process is primarily automatic once the logic hub and configuration are set up.  

Regarding the comprehensiveness of Sentinel's security protection, it's less a tool for protection and more of a solution for providing an overview, management, and optimization of security processes. The most significant security features are found in the Defender line of products. 

We can automate some aspects of 365 Defender, but MS Sentinel is required for more complete automation.

365 Defender doesn't eliminate having to look at multiple dashboards; we still need to click through numerous dashboards for a complete security overview. Sentinel allows management from a single XDR dashboard.

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'd say, why not save the stress of dealing with multiple vendors? You can have one vendor one click away and seamless integration between your products. 

I recommend the solution; I've worked with it in three different organizations and realized how seamless it is to use the Microsoft suite. They integrate well and help us protect all the services in Microsoft 365.

My company mostly uses Microsoft Office products, so we use 365 Defender for our security. 365 Defender is deployed globally, and it works the same whether you are in Europe, China, or India. It currently covers around 4,000 people worldwide. 

Defender reduced our attack surface with built-in rules for USB-based threats. Sometimes employees plug in a USB containing threats. Defender will immediately stop malicious executables from running. 

We have our own method for defining incident priorities. For example, most identity-related incidents are on the higher side. However, if we see a large number of low-level alerts affecting a single user in a short period, then those need to be checked. Automation can help in these cases. It's good to have, but I don't think Microsoft is currently very capable of machine learning. 

Defender has a security dashboard, but there is a different console for vulnerability management. We can create multiple reports where alerts are categorized and labeled, and Defender provides a single console where we can fetch all those reports. 

There isn't a foolproof method for preventing all cyber attacks, but best practices can reduce risks and limit the impact of threats. If you identify threats, you can build block lists and create regular employee training to tell people what to avoid. 

Preventing threats requires a strong firewall and antivirus solution. Defender is a good one. You can also implement threat prevention and detection technology in your remote environment. Nothing can completely prevent attacks from happening, but you can create policies using threat intelligence to ensure they are stopped. 

365 Defender helps us save time by simplifying threat response. For example, one of my customers uses USB to transfer data from one place to another. Some USB drives contain malicious programs, so I configured a rule to stop the executable. If a user copies documents from the USB with a harmful executable, Defender will lock it down. They can only copy the documents, but the executable will not run. 

It saves us lots of time. It reduces the time we spend on these tasks by about 50 to 60 percent. I switch it to audit mode and collect logs. After a month, I have received hundreds of alerts. With my rule in place to block USB executables, we no longer get alerts for that particular threat. Implementing that single rule reduced our alerts by around 30 percent. 

Defender reduces the detection time. We have a SOC team to review all those logs and alerts, and it helps them work quickly. There is little delay between detection and remediation. 

Microsoft Defender's most critical component is its CASB solution. It has many built-in policies that can improve your organization's cloud security posture. It's effective regardless of where your users are, which is critical because most users are working from home. It's cloud-based, so nothing is on-premise.

When dealing with remote users, you need the coverage of firewalls, antivirus, and all those essential security measures. There are multiple policies available that can help the organization secure its environment to prevent something malicious from entering. You need to flag users logging in from a different IP and guard against brute force attacks by detecting multiple failed login attempts.

There is also an option for identity. Most organizations aren't entirely on the Cloud. They still rely on on-prem data centers, so you need Defender for Identity. Another advantage of a cloud-based solution is that you don't need to constantly upgrade it monthly, quarterly, or weekly. All of your infrastructure is online. 

You need multiple solutions for outside threats. I can see if someone is logging in from a malicious IP before they can access the environment. You cannot completely block cybersecurity threats, but you can proactively resolve them and create a wall around your environment. 

365 Defender's attack surface reduction rules could be more customizable. Microsoft has its own pre-defined rules that can be adapted to every organization, but Defender should support the ability to create custom rules from scratch.

Defender also lacks automated detection and response. You need to resolve issues manually. You can manage multiple Microsoft security products from a single portal, and all your security recommendations are in one place. It's easy to understand and manage. However, I wouldn't say Defender is a single pane of glass. You still need to switch between all of the available Microsoft tools. You can see all the alerts in one panel, but you can't automate remediation. 

Automated remediation can be improved. I'm currently creating a remediation structure there and pushing it to my vendor, but the vendor should have their own way of resolving things. It only alerts you that something is happening. The security administrator needs to take action because Defender's automated capabilities aren't up to par. 

I have been using 365 Defender for more than a year. 

365 Defender is stable. I haven't seen an outage in the past year. We've had 100 availability. Occasionally, the servers go down for maintenance, and the sensors stop working. It doesn't happen frequently. 

365 Defender is highly scalable. 

Microsoft's support is excellent. Most issues resolve on their own, but when we need support, they typically resolve the issue quickly. 

Positive

At my previous company, we used other antivirus and identity solutions, but they weren't a complete package like 365 Defender. For example, CrowdStrike was our EDR solution, which had extended capabilities, or XDR. We had various solutions that collectively did the same thing as Defender. 

365 Defender is cloud-based, so the deployment is straightforward and only takes 10 to 15 minutes. You need to change a few configurations on your devices using Intune. One person is sufficient to do the job. It's a simple installer. 

After the deployment, you don't need to do any maintenance because it's on the cloud. The only thing deployed on-premise is the ATP sensor, which automatically upgrades. 

365 Defender is bundled with our Microsoft Enterprise license. Additional costs for support, etc. depend on the license level. If you have a premium account, you will receive priority support, but it costs more. 

I rate Microsoft 365 Defender a nine out of ten. I personally wouldn't recommend only using a single solution or vendor. If you don't try other products, then you won't be aware of what is happening in the market. There should be multiple products involved, so you can compare the solutions and go with the best one. 

It has helped us identify a lot of loopholes within our environment and mitigate risk. It has improved user experience as well.

The visibility into threats provided by the solution is amazing. If you have Sentinel, you can integrate it with Microsoft 365 Defender. You can then access all of the logs at once with a code. You would be able to quickly analyze and react to any threat.

We are able to prioritize threats with this solution. Depending on the type of license you have, you will be able to access different capabilities. We place very high importance on prioritizing threats because the easiest way to get attacked is through the user or the endpoint. You must have multiple layers of security.

We use several Microsoft security products such as Sentinel, Defender for Office 365, and Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps (Cloud App Security). Microsoft has the highest form of integration, so these solutions integrate in a straightforward manner. Once Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps is unlocked, you can connect to third-party applications as well.

These solutions work natively together to deliver coordinated detection and response. The threat protection that these Microsoft security products provide is comprehensive and very effective.

We use Microsoft Defender for Cloud and make use of its bi-directional sync capabilities. It gives us access to reports and makes reporting much easier as well.

Microsoft Sentinel enables us to ingest data from our entire system. Data ingestion is very important to our security operations because it makes it easy for us to know if there are any vulnerabilities or threats. It flags it, and we can analyze it and also create a query, which brings to light threats. We can then mitigate the threat or attack breach on the device.

Sentinel enables us to investigate threats and respond holistically from one place. It makes life easier for us and helps us not to be caught unaware. There are many forms of alerts that notify you immediately of any threats. You can set up automations, which might even fix the issue or mitigate the issue immediately without the need for intervention. That is, you can create a rule to automatically fix a particular problem.

Sentinel captures a lot of logs, and you'll be able to create action plans through the application to directly handle particular threats. The integration has been done already, so automatically it will send a signal to the environment or to the solution you have integrated with to carry out a particular action.

The cost of Sentinel is on the higher side compared to that of other standalone solutions.

We can automate routine tasks and write scripts to carry out difficult tasks, which makes things easier for us.

This solution has helped us to save 60% to 70% of our time.

Microsoft 365 Defender provides one XDR dashboard, so we don't have to look at multiple dashboards. In the Import Center, all you need to do is to select the solutions that you want, and it will give you multiple options on different categories and different data. It's amazing and straightforward, and you won't need to open other tabs.

We have been able to prepare for potential threats before they hit and take corrective steps. We can immediately identify users or systems that have viruses or malware. We can also find scripts that have errors underneath them. We can discover each element from the history and delete it. It covers a lot of aspects, and the integration with Sentinel helps as well.

Because there's someone actually monitoring everything, when there is a threat or any form of abnormality, all they would need to do is to create a rule or a query to create a particular section and add the action that needs to be carried out. It's easy to get to reports as well. Overall, the solution has decreased our time to detection and our time to respond by 60% to 70%.

Microsoft tends to provide too many features, which makes the solution prone to bugs.

Also, 365 Defender needs to be more flexible during deployment. When it comes to causal admittance, at times it seems slow.

We have been using this solution for about three years.

The stability is okay. Microsoft has evolved a lot, so they tend to make sure that the solution is up to date and up to par with best practices in the environment. They add new features as well.

It's very scalable.

The level of support you get depends on the knowledge of the engineer who has picked up your ticket. I'd rate technical support at seven out of ten.

Neutral

The initial deployment is straightforward as long as you meet the prerequisites. 
It doesn't really take a lot of time to deploy. All you need to do is to set up the policy, then assign the license to the users. Microsoft handles the maintenance of the solution.

Defender Plan 1 is tenant-wise, and Defender Plan 2 is per-user, which makes it more expensive. To have certain features, you would need to purchase the E5 license. For all of the capabilities that the tool provides, the price, though it can be high, is fair. 

I don't think having a single vendor's security suite is the best because once the threat actors are in through the surface, it's easy for them to penetrate. This is because they'll know all the cracks in that particular product. However, if you have another vendor protecting you as well with a different signature database that is separate, then the attackers have multiple walls that need to be cracked.

An average-sized organization can go for the Business Premium plan. Larger organizations can go with E5, which comes with the full functionalities of Microsoft 365 Defender. Overall, I'd give this solution a seven out of ten.

We manage around 5,000 computers inside and outside our company. I use Defender to work on our security score by deploying security policies. We apply all the security recommendations to our computers and patch all third-party applications. We check every day for malware to alert our security teams.

Seven months ago, our security score was 50 score and it's now 84. We applied all the security policy recommendations coming from the solution and we became aware of the vulnerabilities and fixed them all, one by one.

We can also automate some tasks and that reduces daily work. And if we get an alert, and we know it is not a false positive, we automate things so that we don't get that alert again.

And if we find malware or a threat, we transfer it to level-one technical support to check and, after that, to the security team. But a lot of times, it catches malware and takes action to block it automatically.

Defender has also saved us money, about 30 or 40 percent. When we had Symantec, we suffered one attack against our company and we lost a lot of data and a lot of servers, and that was a lot of money. Since switching, Defender has been perfect, catching all malware and taking action automatically.

It has also decreased the time it takes me to check everything. I now spend only one or two hours a day monitoring things.

I like that it's fully integrated with Windows, Microsoft 365 Exchange Online, and Outlook. It is better than other antivirus solutions because it's fully integrated with all Microsoft products. It's easy to integrate them and onboard all Windows devices from SCCM. That is really amazing. Everything is clear in Defender. It's not difficult.

Also, everything for security is in one dashboard. It's great. It's not only for Defender but email and everything else. it makes things very easy. I can check everything at once.

The dashboard should be easier to use. There is also improvement needed in the reporting when it comes to exporting or scheduling reports.

I have three years of experience with Microsoft 365 Defender.

It is very stable.

It is also scalable.

On-prem, we have around 300 servers, a mix of Linux and Windows. We also have around 5,000 clients, all using Windows 10 and 11. We have a plan to migrate all on-prem servers to Azure. In the next six months we are looking to migrate 90 percent of them to the cloud. 

I like their support sometimes.

Neutral

We used Symantec for antivirus and security and we migrated all users from Symantec to Microsoft 365 Defender. It's easier to use than Symantec or McAfee and we can use it anywhere because it's a cloud solution. Also, with Symantec, we suffered an attack and it did not do anything. In addition, we already had an E5 license with security so we decided to use this license more fully.

I onboarded it to all machines using the configuration in SCCM. It was very easy. It didn't take much time.

We checked McAfee but we went with Microsoft because it has improved its product very quickly. Microsoft Defender of five years ago is not like it is now. Five years ago it was nothing, but Microsoft has improved it very quickly.

It works with Microsoft Sentinel and integrates well with that, but we do not use Sentinel in our company.

The solution is primarily used for security response. We work with many government ministries that use Microsoft, Microsoft 365, or security tools like Azure XDR. This solution integrates with other products, helps with detection, and offers quick response times.

The threat-hunting and incident investigation capabilities are very strong. It can investigate and block phishing attacks and monitor them effectively. We can even do endpoint behavior analysis. 

The solution's XDR platform provides unified identity and access management for customers. If the customer is using a Microsoft Enterprise XDR solution, it does. We do have Microsoft Defender for Identity. It's part of the suite itself. Customers can have Defender for Endpoints, Defender for Identity, and Defender for Cloud. All these things combined form the XDR. The main use cases are around identity - to understand whether there is identity hacking, privilege escalation, or some malicious user in the environment. It helps us respond to those events very quickly.

From a coverage point of view, it's good. We are quite happy with it. If we have users with multiple devices, the solution provides comprehensive coverage.

While the solution does cover technology beyond Microsoft, it's strongest when monitoring the Microsoft Suite. We do have servers, and it can monitor them. They don't necessarily have to be Windows servers.

Defender XDR can stop advanced attacks, like ransomware or business email compromise. It depends on how the solution is configured. It does a lot of monitoring and helps the SOC team or the analysis team find issues. 

The solution has the ability to stop attacks and can adapt to evolving threats. It can ingest a lot of threat intel data, which actually gives us the latest information about how the threats are happening. It does a quick analysis of that. 

Some customers use Defender XDR's multi-tenant management capabilities. That said, most of the time, they might not need a multi-tenancy. In one or two cases, customers may have done it, but not very frequently. The multi-tenant management capabilities for investigating and responding to threats across tenants are pretty decent. It provides a very unified view. That's one of the core capabilities of Microsoft XDR - the unification of the view. In a security situation, I might have solutions in multiple places. However, our tenant will be protected, and we will receive alerts. It helps a lot with individual client monitoring. It will help me hunt other tenants as well. It makes it so we have a very cohesive environment. 

Defender XDR has enabled some of our customers to discontinue the use of other security products. However, it's not always based on capabilities. In Qatar, for example, it's a government mandate to use Microsoft as much as possible, so we move a lot of customers over exclusively to Microsoft in those cases. That doesn't mean the other product wasn't performing. It just means there is a heavy preference towards being solely on Microsoft. 

The Microsoft XDR solution has helped some customers to reduce costs. One of the major cost reductions is on the resources side (not on the technology side). As a service provider, we can move to a much leaner team with the XDR setup than with a non-XDR setup. When you have different environments to monitor and different alerts coming in from different devices, then you need more people to do the monitoring and analysis. However, when you have a unified view of the environment, then you can reduce the team to a certain extent. We can do a 25% reduction on a team, which is a considerable reduction since resources are expensive. How much a company can save depends on the environment. If it's small, the reduction in cost may not be significant. It can be as low as 10% or as high as 25%, depending on the size of the environment. 

It's helped us save time. It's difficult to specify how much; however, it's likely up to 25% thanks to the reduction in the analysis needed. 

From a performance standpoint, improvements could be made. 

I've used the solution for one and a half years. 

I'd rate the stability eight or nine out of ten. If it's just a Microsoft environment, the reliability is very good. If it's a mixed environment, I'd rate the stability seven out of ten. 

The solution is highly scalable. 

Technical support is good. We have enterprise support and they are responsive.

Positive

I do not handle the initial setup process. The customer may deploy it across multiple locations. The size of the environment can vary from 100 users to 1,000.

There isn't really any heavy maintenance. You just have to renew the licenses. If it's a small environment, one person can handle that. If it's bigger, there may be two or three people. 

My understanding is that Microsoft is trying to change the pricing. However, right now, it's bundled together. If it could be decoupled a bit, it would help customers be able to afford the solution. 

We are service providers, and we resell Microsoft solutions. 

XDR is basically used for unification. It's more of a dashboard. When you have an XDR, you can monitor the entire environment. You can also see and take actions across the entire environment, which is actually a very big advantage when it comes to a particular software analyst's day-to-day job. They can be monitoring one screen. Typically, if an issue is found, a ticket needs to be made, and that's passed onto an engineer, but with XDR, a lot can be automated. It can help reduce costs related to manpower and make the process more efficient. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten and recommend it to others. Smaller companies may not need it; however, if a company is growing fast or is already sizable, it's a good option—especially if it is a mostly homogeneous Microsoft environment.