Microsoft Defender for Cloud Reviews

We use Microsoft Defender for Cloud to secure our environments across the company. We have the full E5 suite, including Microsoft Defender for Identity and Endpoint. The solution integrates the total spectrum of Microsoft products. 

We are not a multi-cloud environment. We're entirely on Azure. It's not a hybrid environment. Defender only covers the cloud, and we have a different solution for our on-prem environment. 

Microsoft Defender for Cloud has made our environment more secure. We don't have to worry about it as much, and we've never had a breach, giving us a lot of peace of mind. We've improved our security posture because Defender extends the capabilities of a whole range of products, so we don't have any gaps.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud monitors our entire cloud environment. It enables conditional access and incorporates features like number matching and single sign-on for all our cloud apps. It is great for protecting against ransomware and various security threats.

The solution's native integration with our other Microsoft security solutions gives us security insights. It alerts us to potential breaches, old accounts, and nonhuman identities that we need to be aware of. 

It notifies us in time, and we don't have to worry about it. If something comes up, Defender immediately detects it. It lets us choose what we want to do and remedy the issue from the console, whether that's implementing a conditional access policy or an MFA.

We haven't experienced issues with Microsoft Defender for Cloud for our company size of about five hundred people. However, I've heard there might be issues with scalability for larger enterprises.

I joined the company about two and a half years ago, and Microsoft Defender for Cloud was already installed.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud seems stable from my point of view, so I hope it stays like that.

For our company size, Microsoft Defender for Cloud has been great, but there might be scalability issues as you scale up to large enterprises.

I rate Microsoft support seven out of 10. Customer support has been good. We have a portal to request support, and they typically solve our problems within a week. However, we often need to escalate to the second level, as the first level is mainly contractors without the full security insight. Once escalated, a higher-level technician usually resolves the issue.

Neutral

We have always had Microsoft Defender for Cloud since I've been at the company.

It's hard to quantify an ROI with security, but because we haven't had a breach or serious security incident, which would cost millions of dollars, we can consider it a return on investment

The pricing and licensing of Microsoft Defender for Cloud have been good for us. We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license.

We haven't considered another solution. We're a Microsoft Partner of the Year. We're one hundred percent integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem. So we've never even looked to evaluate another solution because Microsoft has been great for us, and we have all our integrations tied up into it. It would be a huge workload to move to another solution.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud eight or 10. While there are areas for improvement, it has been great for a company of our size.

We use Microsoft Defender for Cloud primarily to scan storage buckets and ensure no sensitive data, such as PCI or PII data, is present. We also use it for general resources, including resource groups, storage accounts, and Azure Key Vault.

We don't use it for detection and response. It's more for scanning architecture and data to ensure we have the latest infrastructure configuration. I don't think we're using it for Entra ID. Another team does that. I'm more on the operation side. 

Defender works in tandem with Wiz, so we get insights and email alerts if something isn't compliant. For example, we get an alert if TLS 1.2 isn't enabled. It keeps track of what's compliant and what isn't. 

It alerts us to our vulnerabilities and ensures compliance by marking off a compliance tool checklist. We use Defender's free CSPM functionality, including the Microsoft Cloud Security Benchmark. It's not our primary policy compliance tool, but we get some excellent insights. 

Defender covers a wide range of workloads. It's suitable for key vaults for storage accounts and services. However, there are some gaps in terms of covering entire apps. 

Defender could provide more in-depth visibility into vulnerabilities and services. For instance, we wanted to scan Azure NetApp for sensitive data, but they didn't have that feature. It was only for storage accounts. I want Azure Defender features to cover all Azure resources rather than a few.

Defender for Cloud's prioritized list of remediation for security issues is pretty good but not as extensive as Wiz or other third-party tools. 

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for about two to three years.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable and reliable as advertised.

It is scalable as it integrates seamlessly across services once activated. However, it needs more features across all resources.

I rate Microsoft support seven out of 10. Customer support is decent, but it varies depending on who you get. My main complaint is the you get bounced around a lot, and you have to explain the issue again to the next technician. When you finally get someone good, the service is excellent. 

Neutral

We use multiple solutions, but Wiz and Prisma are among the notable alternatives we've employed. Defender's advantage is that it's native to the cloud, but it's drawback is that the services are limited. While the services it provides are great, they stop at the Azure level. Wiz has wider coverage, but Defender supplements it. 

The initial setup was straightforward, but as we expanded and went through audits, it became more complex.

We did everything in-house without using any third-party assistance.

Our primary return on investment is that we avoid audits and penalties because we're highly regulated. If we're out of compliance, it costs us time and money to remedy the issue. Defender provides proactive, preventative controls. 

Pricing is satisfactory with no significant concerns.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a six out of 10 due to its lack of necessary features to operate as a standalone solution.

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

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

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

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

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

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

It's great. It seems perfectly scalable.

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

Positive

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

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

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

I evaluated other antivirus products like Kaspersky before switching.

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

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

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

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

Microsoft Graph needs improvement.

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

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

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

Neutral

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

The initial setup is relatively simple and straightforward.

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

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

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

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

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

We use Microsoft Defender for Cloud to fill a gap temporarily by providing a platform solution for PaaS scanning, as there wasn't an enterprise-wide product available.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud offers a good range of workload coverage that effectively meets our current needs.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud enhances security operations by providing a prioritized list of remediation for security issues identified through Azure Policy and Sentinel. This integration offers unprecedented visibility into PaaS resources which we have not been able to do before.

It enhanced our security posture by enabling us to scan PaaS resources.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud has worked well coordinating detection and response across our devices, identities, apps, emails, data, and cloud workloads.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is a valuable tool that integrates seamlessly with Azure Policy and our Security SIEM, simplifying implementation and enhancing security posture. Furthermore, its integration with Sentinel provides prioritized remediation steps for security issues identified through both Azure Policy and Sentinel, increasing visibility into PaaS resources and streamlining our security operations.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud could be improved by adding capabilities for NetApp files and more PaaS resources from other vendors, not just Microsoft.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a year and a half.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is stable.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is scalable.

Microsoft customer support has been great so far.

Positive

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is easily deployed using Azure Policy and a workspace.

So far, Microsoft Defender for Cloud essentially plugs the security gap we were looking to fill, so it has shown a return on investment.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters. It could be cheaper. Wiz is a little better from a reporting perspective.

We did not evaluate other solutions because Microsoft Defender for Cloud was the easiest to implement under the circumstances and the most readily available. Otherwise, the application would have been subject to the standard intake and other corporate processes.

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

As a consultant, I implement Microsoft Defender for Cloud for different customers with various use cases. The primary goal is to enhance security for cloud usage in many different ways.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a prioritized list of remediation for security issues. We implemented routines to go through all the recommendations on a weekly basis because there are new recommendations all the time. It has definitely made it easier to stay on top of things.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud has definitely improved the security posture. There is at least a 50% improvement.

The coordinated detection and response across our devices, identities, apps, email, data, and cloud workloads is very good. The implementation of Copilot for security brings it to a whole different level where you can use normal language to ask things.

The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security. It has made the cloud environment more secure, thanks to all the recommendations we can get. They often come with step-by-step instructions, making it easy to implement the suggestions. This greatly increases the security of the cloud environment.

It seems to be very comprehensive in terms of the range of workloads. I have not found anything that is missing. It covers pretty much all the common scenarios.

With the new Copilot functionality available everywhere, it is challenging to pinpoint areas for improvement. If I put in a lot of thought, I might identify things, but right now, nothing significant pops into my mind, but there is always room for more transparency, especially in pricing.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Cloud for a few years, probably two or three years.

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very stable. I have never experienced any downtime.

The solution seems scalable. You can use most of these cloud platforms as you need. If you need more of it, you can do that. I appreciate the flexibility of the usage.

Being a Microsoft partner company, we have direct lines into Microsoft. Although Microsoft is a large organization, once you work with something for a while, you know where to go. It is a big company, and all big companies might have problems with communication at times.

Positive

I did not use a different solution before Microsoft Defender for Cloud. 

The initial setup is easy. It is straightforward and well-documented. If you need more information, there is always good information on Microsoft's documentation website.

In terms of the implementation strategy, you need to do some research beforehand. Once you have done that, you know what you want to protect and at what level. After you start using it, you get the recommendations, and then you just follow them. It is quite easy.

I am the consultant who manages the initial deployment.

The biggest return on investment is the rapid improvement of security posture. It takes time to find all these small things and recommendations on my own. The system's ability to provide prioritized lists of issues saves a lot of time, allowing me to focus on other tasks.

Understanding the costs of cloud services can be complicated at first. As with a lot of things in the cloud, it can be quite hard to understand the end cost, but it becomes clearer over time. Early on, the lack of transparency is a challenge. Microsoft does not tell you the cost when they launch something. It is clever marketing, and there is room for improvement there. There should be clarity from the start.

We did not evaluate other solutions before deploying Microsoft Defender for Cloud. We are quite heavily invested in Microsoft's ecosystem.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Cloud a nine out of ten. There is always room for improvement, but it is a highly effective solution.

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

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

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

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

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

I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

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

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

Positive

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Defender for Cloud has improved our security posture.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is scalable.

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

Positive

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

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

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

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

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

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

No maintenance is required from our end.