Microsoft Defender XDR Reviews

Extended XDR expands threat protection across endpoints, email, identities, and cloud environments.

Microsoft Defender XDR provides strong identity protection with comprehensive insights into risky user behavior and potential indicators of compromise. It includes capabilities for monitoring Active Directory against attacks and threats, making it a broad and deep solution for identity security.

Improving scalability, especially for very large tenants, could be beneficial for Microsoft Defender XDR. Additionally, enhancing the privilege access management capability would make it a better solution overall.

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

Microsoft Defender XDR is very stable. I would rate the stability as a 10 out of 10.

I would rate the scalability of the product as a 10 out of 10.

Microsoft's customer support for Defender XDR is generally very good and I would rate it at around an eight out of ten. Larger customers like us, especially those partially owned by Microsoft, tend to receive excellent support. However, smaller organizations may not experience the same level of support.

Positive

Microsoft Defender XDR is typically deployed at the organizational level across multiple locations and departments. Maintenance is required, and the number of people needed depends on the organization's size and complexity. It could range from a large team for a big organization to just a few individuals for smaller ones.

Microsoft Defender XDR is expensive, especially for the full suite functionality. However, when compared to buying multiple-point solutions separately, it may be comparable in price. Overall, it is competitive within the market, but the broad capabilities make direct cost comparisons challenging.

Clients implement this tool to address various security issues efficiently. Microsoft Defender XDR offers a unified solution for a wide range of security needs, including extended detection and response across multiple platforms like Office, endpoints, mobile, and identity.

Microsoft Defender XDR includes some identity and access management features, especially when used alongside Azure Active Directory's privileged access management capabilities.

While primarily focused on Microsoft technologies, Microsoft Defender XDR can integrate with third-party SIEM vendors and covers multiple operating systems, including macOS, iOS, Android, and Windows, through its Defender for Endpoint and Intune capabilities.

Microsoft Defender XDR is designed as an XDR solution, utilizing the Mitre ATT&CK framework to detect and correlate events across various areas of compromise. It can identify and correlate events related to advanced attacks, such as business email compromise and ransomware, affecting security operations by providing insights into the events leading up to such attacks.

When security products like antivirus and vulnerability management software are discontinued in favor of Microsoft Defender XDR and other Microsoft 365 tools, it streamlines operations but may require less manual correlation of security events.

Some organizations might experience a 10-20% cost reduction with Microsoft Defender XDR, but for me, the main goal is to improve detection and response capabilities, not just save money. It is about adapting to the evolving threat landscape rather than focusing solely on cost savings.

Microsoft Defender XDR has saved time for our security team, making our operations more efficient.

For those evaluating Microsoft Defender XDR, my advice is to understand your requirements and map them to the appropriate licensing capabilities. It is not a one-time project but an ongoing process, so plan for continuous improvement of your security posture.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Defender XDR as an 8 out of 10.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have used 365 Defender for five years.

365 Defender is stable.

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

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

Neutral

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

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

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

The price of 365 Defender is reasonable. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Positive

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Microsoft Defender XDR is stable.

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

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

Positive

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

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

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

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

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

I'm using the solution for security.

Previously, we weren't using anything and now we can configure privileged access and rules. We now operate in a more secure environment. 

It's great that it's a cloud solution. You don't need to worry about physical hardware.

You can configure the product very easily. It's simple to implement and easy to run.

The XDR platform provides unified identity and access management.

We only use it to cover Microsoft products; it works really well. 

365 Defender stops lateral movement of advanced attacks, like ransomware or business email compromise. It protects us from spam and ransomware. 

So far, we haven't had any attacks. It also allows us to adapt to evolving threats. 

We use the solution's multi-tenant management capabilities. It's easy to access and helps with investigating and responding to threats across tenants. 

With Microsoft, we get multiple services under one platform.

With Defender, we've been able to reduce costs. We've likely saved around 25% in costs so far. We've also been able to save time - around 10% to 20%.

You can customize the product based on your requirements - and everything is available under one platform.

The solution can improve the rules and privileges it offers. They need to be more transparent with changes. Often, changes come too rapidly.

I've been using the solution for seven months. 

The solution is a stable product. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

It's scalable. I'd rate the ability to scale nine out of ten. You can scale according to your needs. 

Support is very good. 

Positive

I also use SentinelOne and Splunk. Microsoft Defender is easy to implement and is user-friendly. Splunk, however, is not user-friendly.

The deployment is easy.

We have 20 to 30 people working on the solution. 

There isn't really any maintenance needed. 

The pricing is reasonable. It's cheaper than other options. 

I'm a Microsoft customer. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I would recommend the solution to others.

We use Defender XDR to monitor our network. We use it for when we analyze email and check endpoints.  

XDR is our second solution. We have two. We have it in basic mode as an antivirus and as an XDR. We use the DLP in our company as well. We can look at threat intel for vulnerabilities, and we check to see if vulnerabilities are present within our environment. We do that through Defender. It's useful for threat hunting. 

We have it integrated with Sentinel and we manage our incidents from Sentinel. We can do a detailed analysis of what actually happened, and it gives us the ability to log in remotely on devices. For example, if you have a problem with your PC, one of my colleagues can take the file from the PC remotely. As long as you have permissions as an administrator you can do that. Otherwise, you can create an incident and escalate it to the right admin.

The file analysis is helpful. When we have phishing emails Microsoft itself can analyze the file in the sandbox and then give you a detailed report. It's helped us respond better and increased the security of our organization.

I like the attack graph of each incident. It's really handy, and there's a summary. For example, you can see what had happened with a timeline. And if you go to investigate, the evidence will be there, including the users and devices. Co-pilot is integrated there as well. With just one click, you have a summary of what to do and the next steps. For young analysts, it is quite helpful.

You can have security administrators or global administrators. You can set up different permission structures outside of Defender.

The solution's security extends or covers more than just Microsoft technologies. Linux machines can be used, for example. It is possible to install an agent for Linux so you can monitor also Linux machines.

Apart from having everything within the same console, you have alerts.

The attack disruption capabilities positively affect our security operations. We can integrate with third parties. If an email comes in with a file attached, Microsoft's intelligence would be able to tell if it's a phishing scam, and it can automate the deletion.

We do educate and train our users, however, it provides an extra security layer that catches suspect emails. It reduces the risk of users accidentally clicking on phishing emails. 

The solution adapts to evolving threats. It's a next-generation solution. The machine learning and AI are integrated. With the help of machine learning, it can block quite a bit of suspicious activity.

It offers multi-tenant capabilities. We have four different tenants, and for each, we have a different console, so I don't directly deal with multi-tenant capabilities; however, it is possible. 

We do use the solution with a variety of others. We haven't reduced the number of other products we use for security. However, it's quite handy. It blocks a lot of malicious attempts. Nothing really gets by it. The automatic incident response and protection have kept us very safe, even though we do have other backups there on offer as well. 

We've saved a lot of time with the automated detection. It reduces the time we need to respond and react. We've saved maybe 30% to 40% of the typical amount of time it would take, thanks to automation. For example, if there is, a phishing email goes to the XDR if we had to do an analysis and a report, that alone might take 20 minutes to an hour. Then, we have to remediate, delete and block. With automation, we can save those 20 minutes to an hour. The process is automatic, so we don't have to manually do it. Also, if you have a bunch of suspicious domains or IPs, it will take time to manually go through everything, one by one. However, we can automate the blocking process and save ourselves a lot of time. 

The AI could be improved. As an analyst, I want to be able to interact more with AI. The AI simply sends summaries. I can't ask it, for example, if it has seen any suspicious activity with device two. I have to go and check device two for myself.

I've used the solution for 15 months so far.

The solution is quite stable. I'd rate stability eight out of ten.

We have 15 to 16 people using the solution in my organization. Then we have users on various Microsoft accounts. There may be 50 or more users in total. We have the solution spread across multiple locations. 

It's a scalable product.

I've had colleagues mention that they were very pleased with Microsoft's support. Once you open a ticket, the response you get is usually within an hour or two. 

Positive

I do use different solutions. Microsoft is very good compared to other market leaders. It's a leader itself. I've used CrowdStrike, for example, and I'm familiar with Zscaler. 

My understanding is it is quite easy to deploy the solution. Between deploying the agent and the initial installation, it may take one to two hours. Then, of course, you have to customize the product. However, as a SaaS product, it's very easy to deploy. I'm not sure if any ongoing maintenance is needed after deployment. 

I don't have visibility into the pricing. However, Defender is included in the price of a larger bundle. As a Microsoft customer, it's my understanding that users can access discounts. 

I'm a Microsoft customer. 

I'd advise new users to try a proof of concept. Before the solution is implemented, figuring out the grouping will be very important. You'll want to implement policies based on groups, so they need to make sense. For example, it would be easy to create a structure based on departments.

I'd recommend the solution to others. Microsoft is quite handy. You can get a full overview of your vulnerabilities, which makes investigations easy.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

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

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

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

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

I have been working with it for three years.

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

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

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

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

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

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

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

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

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

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

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

It offers high stability.

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

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

Neutral

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

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

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

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

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

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

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