Microsoft Sentinel Reviews

I use Microsoft Sentinel in my work as an MSSP and as a threat detection engineer.

One of the most valuable features of Microsoft Sentinel is that it's cloud-based. I previously worked for a very long time with AXA since 2006, but Microsoft Sentinel's ability to scale virtually and budget-dependent is a huge advantage. Before that, everything was on-premise and required some forklift upgrades, and it was a bit of a nightmare.

Microsoft Sentinel is relatively expensive, and its cost should be improved. Although Microsoft has been working on providing additional discounts based on commitment tiers, it's still in the top three most expensive products out there. They are certainly trying to compete with the likes of Splunk.

I have been using Microsoft Sentinel since April 2020.

Since the time that I've been using Microsoft Sentinel, I've seen five or six serious outages. That's not uncommon with cloud providers. Generally, when it's a major outage, it's pretty catastrophic.

The scalability of Microsoft Sentinel is pretty good.

I have contacted Microsoft Sentinel's technical support a number of times, and my experience with them has been pretty good.

Before we started using Microsoft Sentinel, we previously used Splunk and ArcSight. Having a brand name like Microsoft was one of the reasons we decided to switch to Microsoft Sentinel. I was working for an MSSP at the time, and at the start of the service, they decided to run their MSSP based on Microsoft Sentinel. So it was more of an environmental thing than a conscious decision to switch to Microsoft Sentinel.

The deployment of Microsoft Sentinel is relatively simple, but the data onboarding is the complicated part.

Two people are required for the deployment of Microsoft Sentinel.

Microsoft Sentinel's evolution, use of CI/CD, and automation capabilities have helped us see a return on investment.

Microsoft Sentinel's pricing is relatively expensive and extremely confusing. I have raised this issue with Microsoft directly. It's not an easy thing to do, especially when you consider commitment tiers, discounts, and several variables that go along with it. It would be very difficult for the uninitiated to get a true reflection because you'd need to know about the product to get a cost. Suppose I go with the online pricing calculator. In that case, I need to know the difference between analytics and basic logs. I also need to understand the implications and limitations of selecting a particular option. And that's not clear from the pricing tool. So I think from that perspective, they should democratize it and make it a lot simpler and easier to do.

The visibility that Microsoft Sentinel provides into threats is great. They got a lot of content out of the box and have an active community. I absolutely love the cluster functionality and the cluster query language. I definitely wouldn't want to go back to anything else. It's an incredible query language.

Microsoft Sentinel helps us to prioritize threats across our entire enterprise. The out-of-the-box content and behavior-analytic functionality that Microsoft Sentinel provides certainly help a lot.

There's a whole cloud stack like Defender for Endpoint, Defender for Cloud, and Defender for Cloud Apps that we interface with. I am not directly responsible for configuring and managing those different products within my company. However, we interface with each of them because we take their log data.

It was very easy to integrate other Microsoft security products with Microsoft Sentinel. The other Microsoft products I mentioned have done a great job of making it very simple to integrate. It's probably easier than all the other services. Being Microsoft products, there's a very tight integration, which is great.

I don't have any direct involvement with configuring Defender for Cloud. However, we take the logs from all the Defender suites like Defender for Identity, Defender for Cloud, Defender for Cloud Apps, Defender for Endpoint, etc.

Microsoft Sentinel enables us to ingest data from our entire ecosystem. It is more challenging regarding the on-premise stuff and unsupported SaaS services. You could leverage the available functionality, but it's certainly not as easy as the native Microsoft Cloud products it integrates with. There's a lot more to it in terms of being able to ingest data from an on-premise data source. This data is very important to our security operations.

Microsoft Sentinel enables us to investigate threats and respond holistically from one place.

The comprehensiveness of Microsoft Sentinel security protection is good. It is constantly evolving. I would like to see Microsoft add more automation, but they're on a journey to expanding their capability. I expect to see a change in that space. Since I started using the product, it has evolved, and the evolution of the product from two years ago or three years ago has been huge.

The cost and ease of use of Microsoft Sentinel against standalone SIEM and SOAR solutions are on par with Splunk in terms of costs. It's on par with what Splunk costs or slightly cheaper. It depends on how you set it up, but it's not always evident. Microsoft would prefer you to pay more than less. Certainly, from their perspective, it could probably put out more guidance on the optimization of cost. In terms of its use and functionality, it's definitely on its way to becoming a market leader. I can see that through the evolution that occurred in the last three years. There's always more and more functionality being added. I would like to see more expansion in terms of the provision of functionality in the dashboarding and work booking component. They could spend more time on expanding our capabilities. Splunk can easily plug into D3 libraries to create really good visualizations. The visualization capability within Microsoft Sentinel at the moment is somewhat rudimentary. You can always plug Power BI into it, but it's not a native product feature, and you need to buy and pay for Power BI.

From an overall management capability, Microsoft Sentinel has certainly made life easier. The introduction and addition of the CRC process are great. Historically, many SIMS haven't had that capability or ability to be integrated with the CRC system. So the automation component of that has allowed the deployment of infrastructure's code to speed up the process of the actual deployment massively in the MSSP environment. Historically, when it was on-premise, it would take two weeks to two months to get that all done. Whereas now, you can spin up a new instance and onboard all the cloud stack within a few days, which is huge.

Microsoft Sentinel has the hunting functionality. From that perspective, you could run a whole number of queries at the same time.

Microsoft Sentinel has not helped eliminate having to look at multiple dashboards. They need to expand that functionality.

Microsoft Sentinel’s threat intelligence helps us prepare for potential threats before they hit and to take proactive steps. They’ve recently introduced the Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence feed, which is a good step forward. It’s come out of the RiskIQ acquisition, which is great. However, I would like to see more native integrations with threat intelligence feeds from financial services, local country threat intelligence feeds, and CSC feeds from government institutions. They work quite closely with the government in many places already, and it would be a huge advantage to have really simple and easy integrations. They could do more in that space in terms of providing alternative threat intelligence with the ability to integrate seamlessly and easily with threat intelligence from other sources. They do already provide connectors, but it isn’t easy. In my experience working in the industry, I’ve seen a company that effectively had a threat intelligence marketplace built into it. So you could very easily and quickly select threat intelligence providers through a number of clicks and then onboard that data very quickly.

Microsoft Sentinel has helped us save time as opposed to our previous solution. Microsoft needs to add even more automation. If you look at their competitors like Palo Alto Cortex, they already have a lot more capability out of the box. Microsoft needs to expand further that out-of-the-box automation capability.

Based on previous experience, Microsoft Sentinel has decreased our time to detection or our time to respond.

Microsoft Sentinel does not need any maintenance because Microsoft does that. However, I have monitoring rules set in place to watch what's going on. For example, we've seen outages in the past, which caused delays in incident creation. There's very little out-of-the-box content to help monitor Microsoft Sentinel.

I would always go with a best-of-breed strategy rather than a single vendor’s security suite. The evolution of Microsoft Sentinel itself has been quite amazing to see. The solution has become more feature-rich in the last two years. I hope this evolution continues and will likely leave the others behind.

I suggest to those evaluating Microsoft Sentinel to do a proof of concept.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Sentinel a seven out of ten.

We are using Microsoft Sentinel for our traditional SOC. So previously, we had multiple products, like VM products, log analytics products, and analysts. We are making so much effort to analyze incidents and events in the security operation center., after which we decide whether it's an incident or an event, and we take action. After Sentinel's implementation, it would be much better and much simpler. For instance, we can now save much more time since in Sentinel, there is artificial intelligence, so the system will decide for you instead of a human. The system will learn what kind of thing you should take action on, and it will save some time since you do not need much human power. In traditional SOC systems, there were three or four people. But in Sentinel, it's much easier, and you do not need so many people in the SOC. So you will save time and keep it cost-effective.

Previously, we were incurring a huge cost being paid to a person. But in Sentinel, you do not hire anyone because the system provides system insights through the cloud applications. So you do not need to put effort, or you don't need to hire either of the senior people. So in, in your SOC team, would be mid-level people, and it would be fine. Also, you do not need so many people. So, one or two people left the organization after the central implementation. So we just have an agreement with one company at a professional level since they're also managing Sentinel. We do not need to pay for the maintenance of applications. So that's also a benefit for us. So, in this case, we are only paying Sentinel yearly or annual costs.

Previously, we could not do some automation. So in Sentinel, we create some playbooks, and with some features in the playbooks, we have some capabilities. For example, when a virus enters the system, we will take action to keep the system safe. So, the machine with the virus can be automatically isolated from the network, and this might be a pretty cool feature in the solution currently.

Microsoft Sentinel has improved our entire SOC, like our log system and incident response. So we are able to quickly respond to incidents and take action. Even though Microsoft Sentinel has already improved our system, it should further improve for on-premises systems or traditional systems, especially to get or collect logs from the legacy systems. Also, Microsoft should improve Sentinel, considering that from the legacy systems, it cannot collect logs.

I have been using Microsoft Sentinel for about six months. My company has a partnership with Microsoft.

I have not contacted technical support.

We are using Microsoft Intune. From the mobile device management point of view, it makes work very easy. We are just planning that with Microsoft Intune, we can easily export some logs to Sentinel to analyze them. We are not using this feature right now, but we are planning. If you are using Microsoft applications, it's very easy to integrate them with other Microsoft products.

Defender is something that we are using as an antivirus for Android applications, but we are not using it on the cloud.

From a cost point of view, it is not a cheap product. It's, like, an enterprise-level application. So if you compare it with a low-level application, it's expensive, but if you compare it with the same-level application, it's pretty much cost-effective, I think. Because for other products, you need to purchase them by paying thousands of dollars. In Sentinel, you pay for how much you use, or you just pay for how much you consume storage, log interface, or system. It will not be a one-time cost, but it will be like a continuous rental system, where you subscribe to an application, and then you use it. That's very easy. I think the company got the solution for a long time. If you purchase some products, you need to invest in something, and it increases your investment budgeting. Many enterprises do not like investments. But this is not a one-time cost, to be honest, since continuously, we will pay. This is maybe a negative point of view, but considering from company to company, it entirely depends on a company's strategy.

Previously, it was a little bit difficult to find where an incident came from, including which IP address and which country. So in Sentinel, it's very easy to find where the incident came from since we can easily get the information from the dashboard, after which we take action quickly.

Sentinel does provide me with the ability to set priorities on all the threats across your entire enterprise. So, it is very important because we were previously getting the service from the outside. It would be yes. Sentinel is a next-generation SOC. So, Sentinel also still develops some applications on Sentinel's site, so maybe in the next release, they will introduce a much more effective version for the company. I'm not sure how many companies use it right now. Maybe in the future, more companies will use Sentinel because its features are such that compared to the traditional SOC systems, they are not affected since the system is a cloud-based system. So it's easy to manage. Also, you don't need to care about it from an infrastructure point of view. Additionally, we don't need to take care of products, and we don't need to take care of maintenance. From a product point of view, we do not need to manage since we just need to focus on the incident event.

Right now, we are using very traditional applications, so there is no use of native Microsoft applications right now.

Sentinel enables me to ingest or collect data from my entire ecosystem, but not all of them, because some traditional applications cannot provide some data needed for export. It cannot allow you to get reports or logs from outside. It's a challenging point, so this might be an opportunity for us to change the traditional application. In traditional applications, and sometimes in IT systems, it might be very difficult to get data insight. In some cases, we need to change the application since, in traditional applications, you cannot get support. To fix it, you need to decide something, or maybe you need to decide on the application change. It might be an opportunity for you. But in the next-generation application, there is no problem. With a new application, you can easily integrate with Sentinel. In Sentinel, the negative point is just related to cloud applications. With cloud applications, maybe sometimes you cannot get data from the on-prem application. So if you use a cloud system, like Sentinel, which is a cloud system, then it's very easy. If you are using an on-prem system, Microsoft Sentinel sometimes may not be easy to integrate.

Sentinel allows me to investigate threats and respond quickly and thoroughly from just one place. It accelerates our investigation, especially our event investigation and incident investigation. Using Sentinel, we take quick actions and get quick insights after its standard implementation. So it is time-efficient.

Previously, we had no SOAR applications. In Sentinel, if you want to take action quickly, you need to create playbooks so that if something happens, you can just develop an application like a playbook in Sentinel so that if something happens, you can tell Sentinel to take action. You can freely create your own playbooks since it's very easy. In my opinion, this is the best feature of one product. Normally, you need to purchase two applications or two products. But in Sentinel, they combine everything together. This is the most beautiful feature for me.

Sentinel helps automate routine tasks and help automate the finding of high-value alerts. We do not need to create manual operations like when our system engineers see the incident and they do a system analysis. So after Sentinel, the system analysis is not done by anyone since Sentinel can already make decisions and then take action by itself. So at this point, there's no human power. Sometimes human power is needed, but maybe eighty percent or ninety percent of the time, there is no human power needed. So, it has caused significant improvements in our entire company.

Sentinel has helped eliminate having to look at multiple dashboards and giving us just one XDR dashboard. Previously, we had to check multiple dashboards, especially in relation to whether logs were coming and other things, like incidents and events. In Sentinel, you do not need to check many dashboards. So you are just designing one dashboard, and then, on the entire dashboard, you will see everything. So, it now saves time since previously there were multiple dashboards causing our engineers and our analysts to get confused at times. So they used to ask our managers to understand better. Currently, it is very easy to understand since one needs to check in on one dashboard, and there's no confusion among the engineers. But they do not need to ask anyone to understand. Apart from better understanding, it has improved our systems.

From a security point of view, you need to go with multiple vendors, but this is a traditional system. But right now, if you want to create a good security system, you need to implement each product with one vendor. Because vendors currently state that, if you want to have a high-level security system. You need to implement each product on a security level from one vendor. Microsoft-level vendors offer many features, but people only just purchase or use one product, and that's all. It's not good for security infrastructure. So, you need to implement all security products from just one vendor. I think one vendor and the needed security products will be enough for a company. Sentinel is our next-generation SOC. Currently, I don't see any competitors at this level.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten.

We provide managed security services to customers in Myanmar using Microsoft Sentinel as a cloud media SIEM. Most of the use cases involve retention, and we use all the features of Microsoft Sentinel. We also use other Microsoft security products like Defender for Endpoint, and most of them are integrated with Sentinel. 

Microsoft Sentinel is a cloud-native SIEM solution, so it helped us reduce our infrastructure costs and deliver better services to our customers. We don't need to pay upfront costs because it is in the cloud. We used an open-source SIEM solution before implementing Microsoft Sentinel, but that wasn't satisfactory for our customers. Sentinel helped us provide more robust managed security services to our customers.

It consolidated multiple dashboards into one and helped us be more proactive. However, our team is still trying to mature to a level that we can adopt a more preventative approach to security. Sentinel significantly reduced our detection time. Without Microsoft Sentinel, our SOC analyst might take 30 minutes to an hour to detect an issue, but now it's practically in real-time. 

The biggest advantage of Sentinel is scalability. In addition, we don't need to worry about paying for infrastructure costs upfront. It gives us the flexibility to choose the kind of infrastructure based on each client's needs. Sentinel is also much simpler than other SIEM solutions. The UI is smoother and easier to use.

Native integration with Microsoft security products or other Microsoft software is also crucial. For example, we can integrate Sentinel with Office 365 with one click. Other integrations aren't as easy. Sometimes, we have to do it manually. 

The bi-directional sync is helpful. For example, we have one client using our managed security service, but they don't want to use Microsoft Sentinel. If those products are not syncing or if the solution is not bi-directional, some alerts may be missed. It's essential for both portals and the two folders to be in the same channel it's pushing. The UEBA features are also perfect. We don't see the same caliber of user behavior analytics in other SIEM. Microsoft's UEBA is great for our SOC analysts. 

Microsoft threat intelligence and UEBA still have some room for improvement. There are currently only two connectors available for Microsoft threat intelligence. the threat intelligence platform and the FTIA commander.
Sentinel should offer another option for a third-party threat intelligence platform. There are lots of open-source threat intelligence solutions available. 

Threat handling could be great for our team and for our SOC analyst, but some are unusable depending on our SOC analytics.

Sentinel can ingest data from most of our ecosystem, but some data cannot be called up. For example, if an SAP product is hosted, it will do a specific version, but it cannot be called back to Sentinel. It cannot be directly connected to Sentinel.

Our team has been using Microsoft Sentinel for about two and a half years.

I rate Microsoft support a seven out of ten. They take too long to respond, but sometimes they are great. 

Neutral

We previously had an open-source SIEM, but it lacked the detection and automation capabilities of Sentinel.

The initial deployment was straightforward but configuring integration for some of our projects was challenging because there are few connectors for solutions like Cisco. I rate Sentinel a five out of ten for ease of setup. 

We performed our integration in-house, but sometimes we get support from Microsoft.

Sometimes, it is hard for us to estimate the costs of Microsoft Sentinel.

I rate Microsoft Sentinel a nine out of ten. I recommend it, but it takes time to evaluate because Sentinel is unlike other cloud solutions. 

We're a managed security service provider using Sentinel for its primary SIEM capability. Our company looks after multiple Sentinel instances for a variety of customers. However, we don't do anything through Lighthouse because every customer we monitor wants everything in their own tenant space. 

The company ensures suitable detections are created and loaded into the Sentinel side, and we provide them with KQL to help them with some in-house use cases with a security focus. We also made some dashboards so they could visualize their data and what their issues would look like. We adopt different deployment models depending on the customer. It's usually a public cloud or hybrid in some instances.

We work with a few Microsoft products, but it's mostly the Defender for Cloud Suite, including Defender for Endpoint and Defender for Cloud. It's undergone a rebrand from the Cloud Application Security side. We also use Azure Active Directory, Microsoft Cloud Security, and several other Azure and Office 365 applications.

Sentinel made it easier to put everything into one place instead of checking multiple tools, especially when working with Microsoft shops. They focus a lot of the efforts on the Sentinel side, so the data is being correctly pushed across and easily integrated with third-party capabilities. Palo Alto and Cisco feeds can work almost side by side with the native Microsoft feeds seamlessly.

Sentinel helps us automate routine tasks and findings of high-value alerts from a detection perspective. Still, I haven't made much use of the SOAR capabilities with the Logic Apps side of things because of the cost associated with them, especially at volume from an enterprise environment. It was felt that using those features might push some of the usage costs up a bit. We thought it was more of a nice-to-have than something essential for the core services we wanted to leverage. We avoided using that again, but it was more of a cost issue than anything. 

Instead of having to look at dashboards from multiple parties, we have one place to go to find all the information we want to know. This consolidation has simplified our security operations. 

Usually, it isn't good to have all your eggs in one basket. However, with Azure replicating across the data center, it's better to have all your eggs in one basket to effectively leverage the raw data that would typically be going into multiple other tools. Having everything in one place allows a nice, clear, concise view if you want to see all your network data, which you can do easily with Sentinel.

Some of the UEBA features helped us identify abnormal behaviors and challenge users to ensure it's undertaking particular activities. You can isolate accounts that may have been compromised a bit quicker.

Sentinel reduced implementation time and sped up our response. I can't give a precise figure for how much time we've saved. Onboarding an Azure feed to a third-party SIEM system might take a couple of days or weeks to get the relevant accounts, etc., in place. Onboarding is a matter of minutes with Sentinel if it's a Microsoft feed. Having everything in one place makes our response a little quicker and easier. The KQL can be easily transferred to support the threat-hunting side because all the information is just there.

Our threat visibility also improved. Sentinel changed a lot since I started using it. It's like a whole new product, especially with the tighter integrations on the Defender for Cloud. For customers heavily reliant on Microsoft and Azure, it's much cleaner and more accessible than logging in to multiple tools. 

I think some of the two-way integrations started to come through for the Defender for Cloud suite as well, so whenever you closed off notifications and threats, et cetera, that were being flagged up in Sentinel, it replicated that information further back to the source products as well, which I thought was a very nifty feature.

It helps us prioritize threats, especially with the way that the various signatures and alerts are deployed. You can flag priority values, and we leveraged Sentinel's capabilities to dynamically read values coming through from other threat vendors. We could assign similar alerts and incidents being created off the back of that. It was good at enabling that customizability.

The ability to prioritize threats is crucial because every business wants to treat threats differently. One organization might want to prioritize specific threats or signatures more than another customer based on how they've structured and layered their defense. It's useful from that perspective.

The native integration of the Microsoft Security solution has been essential because it helps reduce some false positives, especially with some of the impossible travel rules that may be configured in Microsoft 365. For some organizations, that might be benign because they use VPNs, etc.

Sentinel lets you ingest data from your entire ecosystem. When I started using it, there wasn't a third-party ingestion capability. We could get around that using Logstash. It was straightforward. The integration with the event hub side allowed us to bring in some stuff from other places and export some logs from Sentinel into Azure Data Explorer when we had legal requirements to retain logs longer. 

I've used  UEBA and the threat intel, which are about what I expect from those sorts of products, especially the threat intel. I like how the UEBA natively links to some Active Directory servers. It's excellent. Integration with the broader Microsoft infrastructure is painless if your account has the correct permissions. It was just ticking a box. It's clear from the connector screen what you need to do to integrate it.

The integration of all these solutions helped because they all feed into the same place. We can customize and monitor some of the alert data from these various products to create other derivative detections. It's like an alert for our alerts.  

For example, we could look at a particular user IP or similar entity attribute and set an alert if they've met specific conditions. If there are more than a given number of alerts from different products, we treat that as a higher priority. It's beneficial for that.

Sentinel could improve its ticketing and management. A few customers I have worked with liked to take the data created in Sentinel. You can make some basic efforts around that, but the customers wanted to push it to a third-party system so they could set up a proper ticketing management system, like ServiceNow, Jira, etc.  

It would be helpful for incident responders to be able to assign tickets and have permissions assigned to them. Once you have escalated tickets from Level 1 to Level 2, there may be areas where you want to control who has access to the raw Sentinel tool. 

I started using Sentinel in July of last year.

Sentinel's stability is great. We only had one outage for a couple of hours, but that was a global Azure issue. 

I think I've not had to worry too much about the scaling. It seems to be able to handle whatever has been thrown at it. I assume that's part of the SaaS piece that Sentinel falls under. Microsoft will worry about what's happening behind the scenes and spin up whatever resources are needed to make sure it can do what it needs to do.

I rate Microsoft support a ten out of ten. We had a few issues with certain filters working with some connectors. There were problems with certain bits of data being truncated and potentially lost. I spoke to some people from the Israeli team. They responded quickly and tried to be as helpful as they could. 

Support made a solid effort to understand the problem and resolve it. They maintained regular communications and provided reassurance that they were sorting out the problems.

Positive

I used Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Splunk. We switched to Sentinel because of the ease of use and integration. Microsoft infrastructure forms the backbone of our environment. We use Azure for hosting, Active Directory for user accounts, and Office 365 for communications and data storage. 

Sentinel made a lot of sense, especially given our difficulties getting our data onboarded into the Elasticsearch stack. We saw similar challenges with Splunk. Sentinel works natively with Microsoft, but we've still had some pain points with some of the data sources and feeds. I think that's just more about how the data has been structured, and I believe some of those issues have been rectified since they've been flagged with Microsoft support.

At the same time, Sentinel is a little more costly than Splunk and the Elasticsearch stack. However, it's easier to manage Sentinel and get it up and running. That's where a cost-benefit analysis comes in. You're paying more because it's easier to integrate with your environment than some of the other providers, but I'd say it is a little on the costly side.

I've spun up my instance of Sentinel for development purposes at home, and it was quick and easy to get through. The documentation was thorough. From the Azure portal, you click Sentinel to ensure all the prerequisites and dependencies are up and running. On the connector side, it's just a matter of onboarding the data. It's straightforward as long as you have the correct permissions in place.

Deployment requires two or three people at most. You probably don't even need that many. Two of the three were just shadowing to get experience, so they could run with their deployments.

It doesn't require much maintenance. Microsoft does a great job of building a SaaS solution. Any problems in the region where Sentinel is hosted are visible on the Azure portal. Once the initial configuration and data sources are deployed, it takes minimal upkeep.

The deployment was done in-house.

It's hard to say whether Sentinel saved us money because you only know the cost of a breach after the fact. We'll probably spend more on Sentinel than other products, but hopefully, we'll see a return by identifying and remediating threats before they've become an actual cost for our clients. 

Sentinel has made it a little easier to get the initial Level 1 analysts onboarded because they don't need to know how to use, say, Palo Alto's Panorama. They can focus their efforts on one query language that enables them to go across multiple different vendors, products, and tools. It's quicker for a Level 1 analyst to get up to speed and become useful if they don't need to learn five or six different ways to query various technologies.

Sentinel's pricing is on the higher side, but you can get a discount if you can predict your usage. You have to pay ingestion and storage fees. There are also fees for Logic Apps and particular features. It seems heavily focused on microtransactions, but they may be slightly optional. By contrast, Splunk requires no additional fee for their equivalent of Logic. You have a little more flexibility, but Sentinel's costs add up. 

I rate Sentinel an eight out of ten. My only issue is the cost. I would recommend Sentinel, but it depends on what you want to get from your investment. I've seen Sentinel deployed in everything from nonprofits to global enterprises. With multiple vendors, you're more at risk of causing analyst fatigue.

Microsoft has done a great job of integrating everything into one place. The setup and configuration of Azure's general hosting environments reduce the risk. Most services are on the cloud, so Sentinel makes it much quicker and easier to get up and running. You don't need to worry about training and getting multiple certifications to have an effective SOC.

I recommend sticking with Sentinel and putting in as many data sources as you can afford. Put it through its paces based on a defense-in-depth model. Take advantage of all the information Microsoft and others have made available in places like GitHub, where there is a vast repository of valuable detections that can be tweaked depending on your environment.

It makes it a lot easier to get started. Many people approaching security with a blank canvas aren't sure where to go. There are a lot of valuable resources and information available.

We are a security service provider, and we are using Microsoft Sentinel to provide managed security services to our customers.

The visibility that it provides is very good because Microsoft is a front runner in threat intelligence and cybersecurity operations. They have their own threat intel team that is very active. They are actively covering any new threats that are coming into the landscape. They are adding detections, queries, playbooks, and other things related to new threats. They have out-of-the-box integrations, and the coverage of new threats is very fast in Microsoft Sentinel.

It helps us to prioritize threats across our enterprise. Whenever we onboard new customers, after integrating all of their log sources, we actively check for any latest threats being present in their environment. Microsoft Sentinel is natively integrated with all the latest threat intel available, which makes it very valuable for us. It is a SaaS application. So, it is very easy to deploy this solution for new customers to cover their security needs.

In addition to Microsoft Sentinel, we use the EDR solution from Microsoft, which is Defender for Endpoint. We also use Office 365 for email purposes. We have integrated Microsoft Sentinel with these products. In Microsoft Sentinel, there are connectors specifically for this purpose. All the logs from these products are available in this SIEM tool, and it is easy to manage everything from a single pane of glass.

Even though Microsoft Sentinel is a cloud-native product, by using the connectors, you can easily integrate your on-prem and cloud resources with Microsoft Sentinel. Most of our tools including On-Prem are currently integrated with Microsoft Sentinel.

It is very helpful in automating tasks that otherwise require manual intervention. There are two ways to do automation. One is by using the automation rules, and the other one is through playbooks. Automation rules can be used to automate simple tasks, such as automatically assigning an incident to a particular analyst who should be monitoring the incident. By using automation rules, you can automate various tasks, such as setting the severity of the incident and automatically changing the status of the incident.

Playbooks can be used to automate high-value tasks, such as blocking a malicious IP in the firewall or blocking a particular user in Azure Active Directory. All such tasks can be automated through playbooks.

There are lots of things that we have found valuable in this solution. Mainly, this is a cloud-native product. So, there are zero concerns about managing the whole infrastructure on-premises.

Kusto Query Language that powers Microsoft Sentinel is another valuable feature. It is a very fast and powerful language.

The integration with different ticketing tools like Jira, ServiceNow, etc. is also a great plus point.

Besides that, the addition of new features to the product is very fast. The overall customer experience in terms of using their Cloud Security Private Community and being able to provide our feedback and suggestions is good. They take the feature requests on priority, and whenever possible, they add the new features in the next version of the product.

Currently, SPAN traffic monitoring is not available in Microsoft Sentinel. I have heard that it is available in Defender for Identity, which is a different product. It would be good if  SPAN traffic monitoring is available in Microsoft Sentinel. It would add a lot of value. It is available in some of the competitor products in the market.

Also Reporting feature is missing in Sentinel. Currently, we have to rely on PowerBI for reporting. It would be great if this feature is added. 

We have opted for the pay-as-you-go model, which doesn't come with free support. If some limited free support was available with the pay-as-you-go model, it would be good. 

I have been using this solution for about one year.

There is a great community for Microsoft Security, and we mostly rely on this Microsoft Security community and Microsoft Q&A forums for support. Currently, we are using the pay-as-you-go model which doesn't come with free on-call support. It would be good if some free support was available, even if in a limited way, with the pay-as-you-go model. So, we haven't used their on-call support yet, but their support from the community has been great. Because of that, I would rate their support an eight out of ten.

Positive

Before Microsoft Sentinel, we were not working with any other cloud-native SIEM solution. 

It's important to understand the daily data ingestion required for you or your customer (in case you're an MSSP). There are price tiers starting from 100 GB/day ingestion. But if your ingestion varies too much or your ingestion is lower than 100 GB, you may go for the pay-as-you-go (Per GB) Model. In the case of pay-as-you-go, it is about how closely you monitor the ingestion of each GB of data and how effectively you limit that ingestion. If you don't effectively monitor the ingestion, the price may be too much, and you may not be able to afford it. You should be very clear about your data usage. Sentinel provides great granular visibility into data ingestion. Some of the data might not be relevant to security. For example, basic metrics or other log data might not be very useful for monitoring the security of an enterprise. If you do the right things and limit the ingestion of data, its license plan is perfect, and you can save lots of money.

We considered AlienVault, QRadar, and other solutions, but we didn't try those solutions before opting for Microsoft Sentinel because Sentinel was having fantastic reviews and it was our perfect first choice for our Cloud-Native SIEM tool. So, we decided to first try Microsoft Sentinel. If we had not found it satisfactory, we would have tried other solutions. After doing the trial version for 30 days, we were very happy with Microsoft Sentinel. The addition of new features was also very fast. So, we decided to go ahead with the product.

Microsoft Sentinel is an awesome SIEM/SOAR tool for customers with active Cloud presence. Even for on-prem customers, it is providing great flexibility for integrations. 

I would rate Microsoft Sentinel a nine out of ten.

We have had various use cases depending on the needs of our customers.

It is a SaaS-based solution. It does not have any versions.

In traditional SIEM solutions, there is a lot of hardware, and there is a lot of maintenance around it. We require a lot of resources for administrative tasks, whereas with Microsoft Sentinel, we don't have to get into all those details straight away. We can concentrate on the use cases such as detection and start ingesting our logs, and right away, get insights from those logs. In addition, traditional SIEM solutions, such as Splunk, QRadar, LogRhythm, or ArcSight, do not support cloud-based logs much. This is where Microsoft Sentinel comes into the picture. Nowadays, everyone is moving to the cloud, and we need solutions like Sentinel to easily ingest logs and then get insights from those logs.

It has definitely helped to improve the security posture.

The in-built SOAR of Sentinel is valuable. Kusto Query Language is also valuable for the ease of writing queries and ease of getting insights from the logs. Schedule-based queries within Sentinel are also valuable. I found these three features most useful for my projects.

Microsoft Sentinel has many native connectors, which are plug-and-play connectors. You don't have to do any kind of analysis before starting. Taking Azure Cloud logs as an example, once you enable Sentinel and the connector, you start getting the logs straight away. You get a visualization within Sentinel through dashboards, which are called workbooks. So, right from day one, you can have security for Azure Cloud. If you have other clouds, such as AWS and GCP, even they can be included right away.

There is not much guidance on the in-built SOAR solution that uses Azure Logic Apps as a service. For people coming from traditional SIEM solutions, it is difficult to understand how SOAR works. Because the security teams are not from a programming or coding background, they cannot directly jump into SOAR. For Kusto Query Language within Sentinel, Microsoft provides a lot of documents and articles, and they also have a community, but when it comes to SOAR, other than a few open articles, there isn't much information. The documentation part of SOAR should be improved.

The dashboards can be improved. Creating dashboards is very easy, but the visualizations are not as good as Microsoft Power BI. People who are using Microsoft Power BI do not like Sentinel's dashboards.

I have been using this solution since October of 2019.

It is stable.

It is a SaaS-based solution. So, as end-users or customers, we don't have to think about scalability. 

Sentinel Contributor and Sentinel Responder are the primary roles of its users. Users with the Sentinel Contributor role can perform anything on Sentinel. The Sentinel Responder role is allocated to L1 and L2 monitoring teams. They actively monitor the Sentinel console for any triggered incidents and remediate those tickets.

In terms of the number of users, it is a typical SOC team, which depends on the number of incidents. We calculate the full-time employees based on how many alerts are being triggered per month. If 1,000 alerts are being triggered per month, we would need eight FTE to run 24/7 operations.

We definitely have plans to increase its usage. Microsoft is continuously improving this product, and we also have private access where we can see what features are being launched and provide input to them.

Microsoft Sentinel is a SaaS-based solution. They are improving it all the time. You can see new features every month and week. They are bringing more and more features based on customer feedback. That's one of the things that I liked the most about Microsoft Sentinel, which I did not see in other products.

I like their support. When you raise a ticket with Microsoft, you'll get a response within four hours or so. A support person is assigned who then directly reaches out to you on Teams to troubleshoot.

They send the ticket to the right team. They reach out and guide appropriately. They inform me that they are taking care of the issue, and if a meeting is required, they ask about a suitable time so that they can block the calendar. I have never encountered any issues with the support team where I had to escalate anything to someone else. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have worked with QRadar and NetIQ Sentinel. These traditional SIEM solutions are not equipped to effectively handle API integrations on the cloud. Nowadays, most organizations are on the cloud. For Microsoft-heavy or cloud-heavy environments, it is very easy to manage and very easy to ingest logs with Microsoft Sentinel.

It was straightforward. Deploying Sentinel doesn't take much time, but the initial design required for any solution takes time. Once you have planned the design, deployment involves using toggle buttons or bars.

In terms of the implementation strategy, being a cloud solution, not all customers are there in a single subscription. There could be various tenants and various subscriptions. We have to consider all the tenants and subscriptions and accordingly design and place Sentinel.

Ideally, it takes two to three months to onboard log sources, and for implementation, three to four resources are required.

We have definitely seen an ROI. In traditional SIEM solutions, we need to have people to maintain those servers and work on the upgrades, whereas when it comes to the SaaS-based solution, we don't need resources for these activities. We can leverage the same resources for Sentinel monitoring and building effective detection rules for threat hunting.

There are no additional costs other than the initial costs of Sentinel.

We didn't evaluate other solutions.

I would recommend this solution. Before implementing it, I will also suggest carefully designing it based on your requirements.

You have two options when it comes to ingesting the logs. If you aren’t bothered about the cost and you need the features, you can ingest all logs into Sentinel. If you are cost-conscious, you can ingest only the required logs into Sentinel.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We work as a managed security services provider (MSSP). We have different clients who have their own security team. 

One company that I worked for recently had a security team of three people, then they hired us for 24/7 analysis and monitoring. For that, I solely worked on building this product, then there are the eight to nine people who do 24/7 monitoring and analysis.

Sentinel is a full-fledged SIEM and SOAR solution. It is made to enhance your security posture and entirely centered around enhancing security. Every feature that is built into Azure Sentinel is for enhancing security posture.

It has increased our security posture a lot because there are a lot of services natively integrated to Azure Sentinel from Microsoft, e.g., Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Defender for Office 365. 

From an analyst's point of view, we have created a lot of automation. This has affected the productivity of analysts because we have automated a lot of tasks that we used to do manually. From an end user's perspective, they don't even notice most of the time because most of our end users are mostly non-technical. They don't feel the difference. It is all about the security and operations teams who have felt the difference after moving from LogRhythm to Azure Sentinel.

It is cloud-based, so there isn't an accessibility issue. You don't have to worry about dialing a VPN to access it. Azure does require that for an on-prem solution that the security part is entirely on Microsoft's and Azure's sign-in and login processes.

Because it is a cloud-based deployment, we don't need to worry about hardware infrastructure. That is taken care of by Microsoft.

Azure Application Gateway makes things a lot easier. You can create dashboards, alert rules, hunting and custom queries, and functions with it.

Its integration capabilities are great. We have integrated everything from on-prem to the cloud.

There are certain delays. For example, if an alert has been rated on Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, it might take up to an hour for that alert to reach Sentinel. This should ideally take no more than one or two seconds.

There are a couple of delays with the service-to-service integration with Azure Sentinel as well as the tracking point.

I have been using it for 14 to 15 months.

Azure Sentinel is pretty stable. Sometimes, the agents installed on endpoints go down for a bit. Also, we have faced a lot of issues with its correctors in particular. However, the platform is highly stable, and there have been no issues with that.

For operations, one to two people are actively using the solution. For analysis, there are eight to 10 people who are actively using it.

Sentinel is scalable. If you want, you can hook up a lower balance security corrector. So, there are no issues with scalability.

We have coverage for around 60% to 70% of our environment. While this is not an ideal state, it has the capability to go to an ideal state, if needed.

I have worked with Azure Sentinel for four clients. With only one of those clients, the support was great. For the last three clients, there were a lot of delays. For example, the issues that could have been resolved within one or two hours did not get resolved for a month or two. So, it depends on your support plan. It depends on the networking connections that you have with Microsoft. If you are on your own with a lower priority plan, it will take a lot of time to resolve minor issues. Therefore, Microsoft support is not that great. They are highly understaffed. I would rate them as six or seven out of 10.

Neutral

We had a full-fledged SIEM, LogRhythm, already working, but we wanted to migrate towards something that was cloud-based and more inclusive of all technologies. So, we shifted to Azure Sentinel and migrated all our log sources onto Azure Sentinel. We also added a lot of log sources besides those that were reporting to LogRhythm.

We have used a lot of SIEMs. We have used Wazuh, QRadar, Rapid7's SIEM, EventLog Analyzer (ELA), and Splunk. We used Wazuh with ELK Stack, then we shifted to Azure Sentinel because of client requirements.

The initial setup was really straightforward because I had already worked with FireEye Security Orchestrator, so the automation parts were not that difficult. There were a couple of things that got me confused, but it was pretty straightforward overall.

Initially, the deployment took seven and a half months.

We used a lot of forums. We used Microsoft support and online help. We used a lot of things to get everything into one picture. There is plenty of help available online for any log sources that you want to move to Azure Sentinel.

I have worked with a lot of SIEMs. We are using Sentinel three to four times more than other SIEMs that we have used. Azure Sentinel's only limitation is its price point. Sentinel costs a lot if your ingestion goes up to a certain point.

Initially, you should create cost alerts in the cost management of Azure. With one of my clients, we deployed the solution. We estimated that the ingestion would be up to this particular mark, but that ingestion somehow got way beyond that. Within a month to a month and a half, they got charged 35,000 CAD, which was a huge turn off for us. So, at the very beginning, do your cost estimation, then apply a cost alert in the cost management of Azure. You will then get notified if anything goes out of bounds or unexpected happens. After that, start building your entire security operation center on Sentinel.

The SOAR capabilities of Azure Sentinel are great. FireEye Security Orchestrator looks like an infant in front of Azure Sentinel's SOAR capabilities, which is great.

The solution is great. As far as the product itself is concerned, not the pricing, I would rate it as nine out of 10. Including pricing, I would rate the product as five to six out of 10.

It's a SIEM tool. Our process right now is to put as much data as we possibly can from all of our network devices into it. We use it as a centralized logging mechanism and the feature that is nice there is that it's agnostic against the types of devices you're using. I have firewalls that can log onto it. I have Linux boxes that can log onto it. I have Windows boxes that can log to it and I can collect a variety of logs from around the organization into it. I can analyze those logs, I can get detections against those logs and use them to take a look at the security footprint of the organization.

All of the different security centers within Microsoft are alerting systems like Azure Defender ATP, the Security Centers, and Azure. All of those products, when they generate incidents and alerts, send feedback into this tool. With this product, you get a single dashboard for managing your security footprint, both from the 365 Azure environment, as well as your on-premise environment.

From a security perspective, it has clearly improved our alerting in our incident management processes. We've also been able to improve other processes for network monitoring and for trouble remediation within the environment. Our infrastructure team and some of our application team are now plugging into the data that's in that tool as they can use it to find issues within their applications rather quickly - a lot more easily than the other tools that they've got, which has been a huge boom. 

We also see that some of our help desk processes have now been informed by it. We have queries that run against the data set that's behind that same tool and they are built specifically for the help desk. For example, if a user's account has been locked out due to the fact that we have all of the data from all the different systems plugged into that tool, we can give the help desk a complete picture of authentication failures against that device so that they can quickly identify where the problem is and resolve the issue for the user.

This system has a list of data connectors and you choose what connects to it. By default, it has access to any of the core Azure data that you have access to, however, those are due to the fact that it lives in that environment. It would naturally have access to that data. Then, you choose which data sources you want to connect to it. Many of them are very easy to set up. They're within the 365 of the Azure portion and a point and click away with a lot of the third-party services. You click a button and do authentication and things connect right up. With some of the Linux, there are setups of Syslogs.

Microsoft has pretty good documentation. It doesn't take long. It's not hard to set up.

The biggest feature we've got out of it is visibility into our environment and what's going on across our estate. Being able to see, for example, anomalous RDP logins, to be able to see deviations from our standard traffic flows on the firewalls, things like that, give us insight into when we may have potential issues or a breach type situation.

The second thing you get is when you’re managing security within the Microsoft environment with Azure 365 you're on-premise you're bouncing between three or four or five, six different tools to do that. This centralizes the management of all of those. You get one pane of glass in all of those tools that give you a very easy way to see what's going on.

It also allows you to correlate between those tools. I can see if I have, for example, a low-priority incident in one tool. If I have another low-priority incident on the other tool made against the same user, that may force me to say, “Hey, maybe those things combined generate a higher level incident that I maybe need to put up for investigation.” That's the advantage of the tool.

The solution does not have specific features that have helped improve our security posture. Rather, the whole idea of making security a little bit easier while also being able to correlate data between multiple disparate systems has, as a whole, improved our security posture overall.

We’ve got process improvement that's happened across multiple different fronts within the organization and within our IT organization based on this tool being in place.

We were tracking in the neighborhood of 20 to 30 incidents a month coming out of one or two source systems within the environment. What Sentinel has given us the ability to do is move up. We're now evaluating somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 to 12 a day.

They're much more robust as a product. What we've been able to do is tune the alerts so that the things that are common, that are false positives that we see all the time, we've been able to filter those out and give ourselves this complete picture as things change and work but we're filtering out the standard data sets. There are things we’re going to look at and walk away from as we know they're false positives.

In terms of receiving false positives, it does take some work to tune the environment, to get it to get rid of all those false positives. It's not ridiculous work, however. I didn't find it to be the hardest problem. It took us a couple of months, doing an hour or so a day to clean them up. Going through that process offered a tremendous amount of learning about the environment. In looking at those false positives, you start to learn things about how people use the environment - things that we didn't realize before. That's extremely valuable for a security team to understand how your assets are used and what your users are doing.

The end users are barely involved in the process. They see our security team more proactively reaching out to them when they may have a problem. For example, I may have a user who has got an excessive amount of login failures against their ID and it's coming from, say, a mobile phone. We'll see that in the SIEM and what we'll do is reach out to the user proactively. Maybe they've been seeing lockout events, or, most likely, they have been seeing lockout events but they haven't quite figured out what's going on and we'll be able to proactively go to them and say, “Hey, we're seeing this, here's the device it's coming from and here's the action you should take and see if we can fix the problem.” It's given us the ability to reach out to the user. In some cases, it's an incident where we want to reach out, get more information from the user to understand whether it was them or not. In other cases, we're reaching out to them proactively and helping solve problems for them that they may or may not even be aware they're having.

Microsoft has a number of detections that they bundle with the product and there's a number of detections that are out against GitHub that are available. We have more and more of those going out every day. Microsoft periodically is releasing more updates. I love the fact that they're giving it to us. They're giving us the queries so we can plug them right into Sentinel. 

We have to do very little editing of the plugins, however, I would love to see the ability to have those queries immediately, as Microsoft updates them. They need to have a streamlined process for updating them in the tool and knowing when things are updated and knowing when there are new detections available from Microsoft.

I've used the solution for two years.

The solution has been extremely stable. We haven't had any downtime that I can recall.

The scalability is great. It's all backed by the log analytics infrastructure. All of the data that we stuff in it is stuck with the log analytics retention times and data storage capabilities which scale wonderfully.

We are using it pretty heavily. At this point, we're plumbing pieces of data from all of our systems into it. We're actively in it every day.

We're constantly adding new data sets too.

I haven't used technical support yet.

In general, the Microsoft technical support unit is okay. There are times when you get help and it's wonderful and there are times when things are not as good. It's not what I would consider the best support I've ever received. That said, they're trying. They could work on their response times.

We did not previously use a different solution. We did a little bit of data consolidation, however, nothing at this level.

We adopted Sentinel as we were looking to mature our security footprint. We started looking at tools that could help us do that, and Sentinel was very easy to dig into, primarily due to the fact that you could bite little pieces off at a time. I didn't have to consume a massive cost. I could throw a little bit of data and consume at a pretty minor cost and prove its value before I started increasing my cost.

The initial setup is very easy.

It's a point-and-click Azure environment. You just click the button and say "yep, I want this."

The solution does not need a lot of maintenance. Once you have the log analytics infrastructure configured, as in your retention times, et cetera, there's your maintenance of the systems that becomes the analytics that you're using. There's a little bit of work that needs to be done there. That was the part that needed some streamlining, however, that's about it. It's managing your rules and your playbooks, et cetera, that needs to be handled.

It's hard to measure ROI on these types of processes. I can't give hard numbers on what the return is. What I can say is that the organization is much better off having this tool in place than not having it in place. The fact is we are improving processes around the organization and the visibility. We recently had some huge vulnerabilities in Exchange that were being breached, and knowing that we have tools like this in place that have detections to help us establish whether we were having an issue or not was useful. The product helps to make us aware of issues and we're not guessing and not spending too much time digging.

We did evaluate other options. Most had a larger acquisition cost associated with them. That was obviously a big factor. The other thing that helped the decision was that we live in a Microsoft-centric environment and most of the Microsoft tools were prebuilt and correctly connected very easily.

The product is part of the Azure platform - now the Microsoft platform. It's all fully managed by Microsoft at that level. We're using it as a SAFe solution.

I'd advise potential users to take a good look at your analytical rules and feed it with data. The more data you give it, the more valuable it becomes.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Sentinel is a solution called SIEM - security information event management. It's for monitoring an entire organization from a security point of view. Along with the monitoring, what happens in the SIEM is you have to raise incidents. If there are any kind of security issues or breaches or people are trying to get into the system, you have to raise an incident ticket. You collect the event information from the systems. You'll be able to see if it's, for example, a machine or account, or an active directory outage. You can process that information using machine learning AI, and then raise incidents. It's basically helping a security operations center team (SOC). With the help of Azure Sentinel, we can build a SOC.

There are plenty of use cases. You have to cover your entire security environment. For example, a brute force attack against your Azure Portal. If someone is trying to guess your password, you will see the incident. When somebody puts four, five wrong passwords, and then a correct password, it could mean someone is trying to guess your password and you would see that. Basically, there are a lot of use cases, however, all of them revolve around monitoring security. Whenever something happens, we should get alerted or we can proactively assess our environment.

With Sentinel, you can also do the hunting. It'll try to identify if your environment is compromised with any kind of attack. In most cases, it'll try to protect your organization before this attack can happen. If somebody is trying to snoop in your environment, we can track him. Or if somebody is trying to guess your password, we can protect the password. If somebody is injecting the malware, we can identify and protect the organization.

The solution has improved functionality as most of the organization will be in the cloud. If an organization is already on the Azure cloud, then they don't have to go for any other solution for the SIEM. They can easily integrate Sentinel. Most of us are on the Microsoft products, so it's very easy to deploy this with the Microsoft products as well as to the other products. 

In terms of Sentinel, it's a best-in-class solution. The SIEM solution is hosted in the cloud. When you compare it with the other tools, the on-premises tools may not be that great.

The best piece about it is when it comes to the traditional SIEM solutions, it's very hard to manage them. First of all, licensing will be there. Then you need to manage underlying infrastructure as well. You also need a big setup. All these things aren't necessary with Sentinel due to the fact that it's on the cloud. You just get a cloud subscription and do a pay-as-you-go model.

The machine learning and artificial intelligence on offer are great. These are the things that happen in the background that we do not see. Whenever you have an incident, it will provide you with all the options so that you can drill down. For example, I have identified one incident where somebody was trying to do a brute-force attack. When this incident was generated, I had a lot of data with which I could start to investigate things.

It provides the best-in-class hunting capabilities. It's very easy to write the hunting logic. You have to write some searching queries. It's very easy to write those all queries and identify the test.

It'll give you the capabilities of automation. Azure is not only about security or infrastructure. It has a lot of programming features, functions, logic apps, and automation. You can easily integrate. If you can do a little bit more programming, then you can integrate it with functions or automation, or anything else.

There is a different tool for security postures. That's called Azure Security Center. From November, it's going to be called Azure Defender. This tool does not do posture management, however, it can integrate with Azure Security Center. There is also this XDR tool, Microsoft Defender. It can easily integrate it. Once you set up the integration between these tools, then you will have the advantage of both the tools. You will have a unified ticketing system where you can view the alerts from XDR and you can view the alerts from the posture management and from the SIEM.

Every month there are new features in Sentinel and the tools are stable. All the features and functionality that those tools provide are slowly coming to the Azure Sentinel as well. So it's improving a lot day by day. 

Initially, we had the data connector that could bring the data from any of the platforms that we wanted to monitor. Now, Microsoft has improved the solutions and they're providing a lot of options. While you can (and now have) almost all the functionalities that are needed for SIEM capabilities, it's still adapting to new things as well. 

Azure Sentinel will be directly competing with tools such as Splunk or Qradar. These are very established kinds of a product that have been around for the last seven, eight years or more. They have a lot of good things going for them and are slightly ahead of Microsoft, which is new to the game. However, Microsoft is adapting. Microsoft keeps working on its solutions and offers feature request platforms as well. We have given them a lot of feedback in terms of some customizations - and they keep adding to it. There are a lot of new things that are in the pipeline. In the next four to six months, we will see more new features which will further enhance the existing tools.

For example, there were some custom fields that were missing. We wanted to do mapping of the custom fields and this capability wasn't there in the Sentinel. However, when we requested it they implemented it.

I have been on Sentinel for the last two to two and a half years. Initially, I was just doing it for my own self-interest, however, for the last one and a half years, it's been more of a professional relationship and I've been working with it for customers.

The solution is quite stable. I have not seen any downtime so far. It is working for customers as well. It's good. It's on a cloud and therefore we need not worry about maintaining the databases or maintaining the platforms, or wherever the data is stored. It's all Microsoft's responsibility.

The scalability is a unique selling proposition for Sentinel. Due to the fact that it's on the cloud, you can scale it up to any limit. Of course, you have to pay for whatever data you are storing. As compared to an on-premises tool the sometimes they may fail to scale, however, this is great. You don't have to bring up a lot of hardware with Sentinel. 

This solution is being used quite extensively right now.

Whether or not the usage will increase depends on the pricing that comes up the more you use it. We have to pay for whatever data, telemetry, that gets into the Sentinel. For example, let's say today I collected 1GB of data, tomorrow I'm going to collect 5GB of data. Microsoft can easily hold this, however, then they also provide you with some kind of plans. You can reserve the space. You can say "I will use 100GB of data per month." Microsoft will give you a discount and you have to pay for the reserved 100GB. It is a pay-as-you-go model.

The solution is used by the development team, which sets it up, and then by the SOC team, which takes over and starts monitoring for security incidents.

Technical support depends on what kind of agreement you have with Microsoft. If you are a premier customer, under the top 100, then they can provide you with some direct connection with the Microsoft program managers. You can have a conversation with them once every two weeks. If you are not in the premier tier, if you are just directly buying it from Azure, then technical support, again, depends. There are two types of technical service. One is the professional and the second one is the premier. Premier support is good. Obviously, you will be paying extra for it. Professional support is not that great. Often, I'd rather not involve them. They will simply mess up things. It's better to just post your questions on the forums and try to get some answers from the experts.

I use all kinds of support. If you are working for a customer who has a very good rapport with Microsoft and they are their top Azure consumer, then they can do things for you. If you give them feedback and you are potentially a big customer for Sentinel, then they will try to adjust things according to your environment. However, if you are not, you are just using Sentinel, then it's okay. It all depends on how much money you are paying and how much business you are doing with Microsoft. 

If a customer is planning to buy Sentinel, then they should initially negotiate with Microsoft for premier support. They can ask for 100 hours of premier support or the fast-track service. You can initially negotiate for a situation where, if some technical issues arise, then you will only work with premier support, and you can reserve your 100 or so hours for that. 

Initially, it's better to agree in advance with Microsoft that you will be needing X number of technical support or the fast-track service or engagement with the Sentinel development team.

I did not use a different solution. I'm from the Azure Log Analytics Monitoring part. I came from that side.

We directly jumped into Sentinel. I've heard that people are doing migrations from Splunk. That's the number one tool that's available for SIEM. However, I directly started from Sentinel.

The initial setup is very easy. You just need some basic knowledge of the monitoring platform called Azure Log Analytics. If you have the knowledge of Azure Log Analytics, then you can easily set up this.

If you just want to set up over the Azure Portal, then it will hardly take 15 to 20 minutes to deploy. Of course, this is not the final setup. The final setup is when you will be connecting it with different sources. For example, if you have 100 machines, you will have 100 Linux machines, you will have routers and switches too. Everything you want to monitor needs to be there. You have to implement these all solutions one by one as per your requirement. If your requirement is you will want Linux machine monitoring, you want firewall monitor, then it can take time, however, it is pretty easy to accomplish.

The pricing model is good. Microsoft does the reservations as well. Perfect planning is needed, as, once you reserve the space, you can save up to 30% or 40% of the cost. If you are not doing good planning, then it'll cost you a lot. However, from a costing point of view, it's fair and comparatively low. It's not a costly service.

I'm not the decision-maker. I was mostly from the Azure Log Analytics Monitoring background, however, when this was released, even the Microsoft CEO and CTO were touting its abilities. Initially, I looked at it for self-interest, and then we thought of implementing it for our labs, and then we found it fruitful. Then we started getting Sentinel projects. 

I'm a consultant and service provider.

It's hosted on a cloud. There is nothing like versioning or anything. It's just software as a service.

I would rate the solution at around eight out of ten. When we do the migration, there are still few people who are used to it. Not many have hands-on experience. Sometimes we struggle in maintaining gaps.

Azure Sentinel is a next-generation SIEM, which is purely cloud-based. There is no on-premises deployment. We primarily use it to leverage the machine learning and AI capabilities that are embedded in the solution.

This solution has helped to improve our security posture in several ways. It includes machine learning and AI capabilities, but it's also got the functionality to ingest threat intelligence into the platform. Doing so can further enrich the events and the data that's in the backend, stored in the Sentinel database. Not only does that improve your detection capability, but also when it comes to threat hunting, you can leverage that threat intelligence and it gives you a much wider scope to be able to threat hunt against.

The fact that this is a next-generation SIEM is important because everybody's going through a digital transformation at the moment, and there is actually only one true next-generation SIEM. That is Azure Sentinel. There are no competing products at the moment.

The main benefit is that as companies migrate their systems and services into the Cloud, especially if they're migrating into Azure, they've got a native SIEM available to them immediately. With the market being predominately Microsoft, where perhaps 90% of the market uses Microsoft products, there are a lot of Microsoft houses out there and migration to Azure is common.

Legacy SIEMs used to take time in planning and looking at the specifications that were required from the hardware. It could be the case that to get an on-premises SIEM in place could take a month, whereas, with Azure Sentinel, you can have that available within two minutes. 

This product improves our end-user experience because of the enhanced ability to detect problems. What you've got is Microsoft Defender installed on all of the Windows devices, for instance, and the telemetry from Defender is sent to the Azure Defender portal. All of that analysis in Defender, including the alerts and incidents, can be forwarded into Sentinel. This improves the detection methods for the security monitoring team to be able to detect where a user has got malicious software or files or whatever it may be on their laptop, for instance.

It gives you that single pane of glass view for all of your security incidents, whether they're coming from Azure, AWS, or even GCP. You can actually expand the toolset from Azure Sentinel out to other Azure services as well.

The most valuable feature is the performance because unlike legacy SIEMs that were on-premises, it does not require as much maintenance. With an on-premises SIEM, you needed to maintain the hardware and you needed to upgrade the hardware, whereas, with Azure Sentinel, it's auto-scaling. This means that there is no need to worry about any performance impact. You can send very large volumes of data to Azure Sentinel and still have the performance that you need.

When you ingest data into Azure Sentinel, not all of the events are received. The way it works is that they're written to a native Sentinel table, but some events haven't got a native table available to them. In this case, what happens is that anything Sentinel doesn't recognize, it puts it into a custom table. This is something that you need to create. What would be good is the extension of the Azure Sentinel schema to cover a lot more technologies, so that you don't have to have custom tables.

If Azure Sentinel had the ability to ingest Azure services from different tenants into another tenant that was hosting Azure Sentinel, and not lose any metadata, that would be a huge benefit to a lot of companies.

I have been using Azure Sentinel for between 18 months and two years.

I work in the UK South region and it very rarely has not been available. I'd say its availability is probably 99.9%.

This is an extremely scalable product and you don't have to worry about that because as a SaaS, it auto-scales.

We have been 20 and 30 people who use it. I lead the delivery team, who are the engineers, and we've got some KQL programmers for developing the use cases. Then, we hand that over to the security monitoring team, who actually use the tool and monitor it. They deal with the alerts and incidents, as well as doing threat hunting and related tasks.

We use this solution extensively and our usage will only increase.

I would rate the Microsoft technical support a nine out of ten.

Support is very good but there is always room for improvement.

I have personally used ArcSight, Splunk, and LogRythm.

Comparing Azure Sentinel with these other solutions, the first thing to consider is scalability. That is something that you don't have to worry about anymore. It's excellent.

ArcSight was very good, although it had its problems the way all SIEMs do.

Azure Sentinel is very good but as it matures, I think it will probably be one of the best SIEMs that we've had available to us. There are too many pros and cons to adequately compare all of these products.

The actual standard Azure Sentinel setup is very easy. It is just a case where you create a log analytics workspace and then you enable Azure Sentinel to sit over the top. It's very easy except the challenge is actually getting the events into Azure Sentinel. That's the tricky part.

If you are talking about the actual platform itself, the initial setup is really simple. Onboarding is where the challenge is. Then, once you've onboarded, the other challenge is that you need to develop your use cases using KQL as the query language. You need to have expertise in KQL, which is a very new language.

The actual platform will take approximately 10 minutes to deploy. The onboarding, however, is something that we're still doing now. It's use case development and it's an ongoing process that never ends. You are always onboarding.

It's a little bit like setting up a configuration management platform and you're only using one push-up configuration.

We are getting to the point where we see a return on our investment. We're not 100% yet but getting there.

Azure Sentinel is very costly, or at least it appears to be very costly. The costs vary based on your ingestion and your retention charges. Although it's very costly to ingest and store data, what you've got to remember is that you don't have on-premises maintenance, you don't have hardware replacement, you don't have the software licensing that goes with that, you don't have the configuration management, and you don't have the licensing management. All of these costs that you incur with an on-premises deployment are taken away.

This is not to mention running data centers and the associated costs, including powering them and cooling them. All of those expenses are removed. So, when you consider those costs and you compare them to Azure Sentinel, you can see that it's comparative, or if not, Azure Sentinel offers better value for money.

All things considered, it really depends on how much you ingest into the solution and how much you retain.

There are no competitors. Azure Sentinel is the only next-generation SIEM.

This is a product that I highly recommend, for all of the positives that I've mentioned. The transition from an on-premises to a cloud-based SIEM is something that I've actually done, and it's not overly complicated. It doesn't have to be a complex migration, which is something that a lot of companies may be reluctant about.

Overall, this is a good product but there are parts of Sentinel that need improvement. There are some things that need to be more adaptable and more versatile.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.