Microsoft Sentinel Reviews

We use Microsoft Sentinel as our main SIEM suite alerts and automation rules. It feeds everything into Sentinel Logs and Realities for security purposes.

Microsoft Sentinel has helped by streamlining our security. We have a nine-member network team, with three members managing security for the city, and Sentinel allows us to operate an unofficial SOC. 

It makes investigations easy. We were spending a lot of time manually investigating and resolving false positives. Once Sentinel was fully integrated and we suppressed those false positives, our SOC environment greatly improved. 

The most valuable feature of Sentinel is the automation. Creating automation rules helps eliminate false positives, which is crucial due to the high amount of noise in security. Sentinel integrates with Microsoft Defender XDR as a single security hub. Sending our alerts from XDR into Sentinel has made it a decent transition to one solution.

We can easily build reports based on Sentinel alerts and logs. Around 80 percent of our logs go into Sentinel. The solution has improved our threat-hunting by enabling us to run KQL queries. If we learn something through threat intelligence, we can run a query to see if our environment is affected.

Sentinel MITRE ATT&CK recommendations strengthen our security posture. For a small security team like ours, the automation and integrated technologies increase our service efficiency.

There is room for improvement in terms of integrations. We have some tools, such as our off-site Meraki firewalls, that have not fully integrated with Sentinel. We lack integration for Syslogs into Sentinel.

Sentinel's stability is great. I don't see us changing Sentinel as our SIEM in the near future.

Sentinel's scalability is excellent. As our organization uses Microsoft Azure and Defender, everything grows together, and we can integrate various features seamlessly.

Customer service and support for Sentinel have been very responsive. Working with a Sentinel engineer helped us tune settings effectively.

Positive

The initial setup process involved working with a Microsoft Expert, which helped in achieving an effective setup.

The implementation team was a Microsoft Expert, providing substantial support in tuning Sentinel post-deployment.

The management has expressed that the return on investment has been favorable, especially due to the reduction in security investigations. However, specific metrics were not shared with me.

We already had the necessary licensing for Sentinel, so we didn't need to to spend extra money. 

We considered Splunk and ano Splunk and another unnamed product, but Splunk was a notable option.

I Sentinel nine out of 10. Our licensing strategy and the positive impact on investigations indicate a good return on investment.

Microsoft Sentinel serves as a centralized hub for collecting and analyzing logs from various Microsoft tools and other sources. It eliminates the need to develop custom toolsets for detecting malicious activities across different Microsoft tools. Instead, Microsoft Sentinel provides standardized rules and playbooks to streamline the process of identifying and responding to potential threats.

For instance, consider a scenario where an employee clicks on a phishing link in an email, leading to the installation of malware on their system. While the endpoint detection and response tool on the endpoint might not detect malicious activity, Microsoft Sentinel, acting as a central log collector, receives the EDR logs and triggers an event based on pre-defined rules.

Upon detecting the suspicious activity, Microsoft Sentinel automatically executes a playbook, which may involve actions such as killing the malicious process or isolating the affected endpoint. This automated response helps expedite threat containment and reduces the burden on security analysts.

It is crucial that Sentinel empowers us to safeguard our hybrid, cloud, and multi-cloud environments. We employ a hybrid cloud setup, and securing our environment using Sentinel is significantly simpler than manual methods. We can gather events in the Central Point and develop playbooks and scripts to automate responses. This streamlines the process and enhances our overall security posture. Additionally, if an alert is triggered, we receive an incident notification via email, prompting us to take action and resolve the issue.

Sentinel provides a library of customizable content to address our company's needs.

Microsoft Sentinel has helped our organization with alerts. We'll receive alerts from Sentinel indicating that we're at risk. It's important to address these alerts promptly. We first need to review the information in the email, and then work on the issue in the office. After that, we'll contact the team members on the relevant shift. There's nothing particularly difficult about this process. It's based on our access privileges, which are determined by our role in the company. If we have a high-level role, we'll have access to all the necessary tools and resources. We'll even be able to receive alerts at home if there's a security issue. The company that provides this technology grants work-from-home access based on security considerations. If someone has a critical role, they'll also be equipped with the tools they need to work remotely and connect with their team members. So, the company that provided the technology can resolve the issue first, and then we can address it. Once we've taken care of the issue, everything will be much easier.

By leveraging Sentinel's AI in conjunction with our playbooks for automation, we can enhance the effectiveness of our security team, subject to the specific rules and policies we implement.

The logs provided by Sentinel have helped improve our visibility into our user's network behavior.

Sentinel has helped us save 60 percent of our time by prioritizing the severity of the alerts we receive. When we receive an alert with a high-risk level, we immediately address it to mitigate the potential security threat. Additionally, we have configured our anti-ransomware software, to further protect our systems from cyberattacks. In the event of a ransomware attack, our Halcyon system will generate an encryption key that can be used to unlock our system. This key is securely stored by Halcyon.

Sentinel has helped reduce our investigation times by enabling us to review an alert, generate a ticket, and resolve the issue simultaneously upon receiving the alert.

The most valuable feature is the alert notifications, which are categorized by severity levels: informational, low, medium, and high. This allows us to prioritize and address alerts based on their urgency. For instance, we would immediately address high-severity alerts. This feature, along with the ability to create playbooks, significantly enhances our workflow.

I would like Microsoft to add more connectors for Sentinel.

Microsoft Sentinel should provide an alternative query language to KQL for users who lack KQL expertise. 

I have been using Microsoft Sentinel for one and a half years.

Microsoft Sentinel is a stable solution. 

Microsoft Sentinel is scalable.

We have to write playbooks to resolve our issues.

Neutral

The configuration of Microsoft Sentinel involved a complex process that required thorough familiarity with the available connectors and the policies to be implemented.

We have seen a 30 percent return on investment.

Sentinel is costly.

I would rate Microsoft Sentinel seven out of ten.

We have five people in our organization who utilize Sentinel.

No maintenance is required from our end.

The usual use cases would be starting from scratch, implementing Sentinel for clients, onboarding log sources, building analytical use case rules, and supporting the platform for operations.

The main benefit is the ease of integration. Having a cloud-based SIEM means scalability. We also received very good support and documentation from the vendor.

All of the features are great. In fact, when they add new features they are always valuable and interesting. There are so many features on offer.

I really appreciate that it is very well documented.

I also use Defender 365, including Defender for Endpoint. It's easy to integrate with Sentinel. In two clicks we can integrate them together.

I have experience with Defender for Cloud. I'm actually getting into the Center for Cloud right now, so I'm just Learning about it. 

Sentinel enables us to ingest data from our entire ecosystem.

It's important to have data visibility for our security operations. Sentinel enables us to investigate the threats and respond from one place. That is very important for operations. We need to be able to easily look and have visibility over what's happening.

Sentinel enabled us to automate routine tasks. It helps us automate the handling of trivial tasks related to alerts. 

With the solution, we no longer have to look at multiple dashboards. I wouldn't say it has completely eliminated looking at different dashboards. As it stands right now, there are two dashboards that we will have to look at. One is Sentinel, and the other one is a ticketing system.

Compared to what's being used, it's saved us some time overall. The ease of use and the clear documentation are helpful in that regard. Someone who doesn't know how to use it can easily go in and find out.

When it comes to ingesting Azure native log sources, some of the log sources are specific to the subscription, and it is not always very clear. Sometimes, if the individual doesn't know what they are doing, they might enable it only on one subscription and not on everything that they need to monitor.

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

I haven't experienced any stability issues. I've experienced 100% uptime. 

I've never seen it scale up or down. If necessary, it likely happens in the background. It's not visible to clients, however, I haven't noticed any issues. 

My experience with technical support is good. It was an excellent experience. They were very, very responsive to the questions that we had. If they were not able to answer on the spot, during the call, they took it back and discussed the issue with their team. Getting an answer was fairly fast. Overall, I've had a good experience with support and I can't complain.

I'd like them even more if I was able to request support on behalf of clients without having to actually access the client's Azure or having to identify the client's tenants. 

Positive

I've used Splunk, ArcSight, and QRadar. Sentinel is excellent compared to those solutions. It could always be easier, however, it's pretty much there.

I was involved in the solution's deployment. The cloud deployment takes five minutes and is very easy. The on-premise portion on the other hand, when I first did it a year and a half ago, was a little bit more complex since it involved a lot of customization. However, now it's more streamlined.

There is no maintenance necessary. It's a managed service. There's no patching of any sort. The on-premises components may require a little bit of maintenance every now and then if they need a patch or upgrade. If there are any changes in the environment they would have to be reflected in the configurations. 

I handled the implementation myself. 

I know the price, however, I don't know how it compares with other SIEM solutions. I don't have that visibility. I overheard not too long ago that Sentinel is on the expensive side. However, there are some capabilities that are fairly new that Sentinel offers to lower the cost. 

I'd rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

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 using Microsoft Office 365 E5 license right now, which means we are using Windows Defender ATP because of its cloud application security platform. We also have Exchange Online Protection. The main thing is we are replacing all of our on-prem solutions with Microsoft Office 365 and Azure solutions.

Our use case is for Azure Active Directory, Advanced Threat Protection, Windows Defender ATP, Microsoft cloud applications, Security as a Platform, Azure Firewall, and Azure Front Door. All of the Azure Front Doors logs are coming to Azure Sentinel and correlating. However, for our correlation rules that exist on the QRadar, we are still implementing these rules in Azure Sentinel because we have more than 300 different correlation rules that exist from the QRadar.  

It is always correlating to IOCs for normal attacks, using Azure-related resources. For example, if any illegitimate IP starts unusual activity on our Azure firewall, then it automatically generates an alarm for us. 

We do not get so many attacks, but if any attacks occur on our Azure Firewall site, then we are able to understand where the attack came from. Sentinel lets us know who introduced it.

It is perfect for Azure-native solutions. With just one click, integrations are complete. It also works great with some software platforms, such as Cloudflare and vScaler. 

The rule sets of Azure Sentinel work perfectly with our cloud resources. They have 200 to 300 rule sets, which is perfect for cloud resources.

They need to work with other security vendors. For example, we replaced our email gateway with Symantec, but we couldn't collect these logs with Azure Sentinel. Instead of collecting these logs with Azure Sentinel, we are collecting them on Qradar. We couldn't do it with Sentinel, which is a problem for us.

It is difficult right now because there are not so many consultants who exist for Azure Sentinel, like there are for QRadar. We are not able to find a Sentinel consultant right now.

In Turkey, we are the biggest energy generation company for the public sector. We head more than 20 power plants right now and have more than 1,000 people working in the energy sector. Two years ago, we started to work with Microsoft to shift our infrastructure and workloads to the Azure and Office 365 platforms. So, our story starts two years ago.

It is stable. We have had one or two issues, but those are related to QRadar. We are creating and pushing logs all the time to QRadar, because the Microsoft security API does not send these logs to QRadar.

One resource is enough for day-to-day maintenance of our environment, which has 1,000 clients and 200 or 300 servers. However, our servers are not integrated with Azure Sentinel, because most of our servers are still on-prem.

For Azure- and Office 365-related products, it is perfectly fine. It is scalable. However, if you want to integrate your on-prem sources with Azure Sentinel, then Azure will need to improve the solution. 

We are using Microsoft support for other Microsoft-related issues. They have been okay. They always respond to our issues on time. They know what to do. They solve our issues quickly, finding solutions for our problems.

Positive

Right now, we are using QRadar for on-prem devices. On the other hand, we have Azure Sentinel for log collecting in the cloud products. All of the Microsoft components give logs to Azure Sentinel, but all of the on-premises resources are being collected on IBM QRadar. So, Sentinel has been helping us because this is causing complications for us. While it is possible to collect logs from QRadar to Sentinel to QRadar, it is difficult to do. So, we are collecting incidents from our QRadar, then our associates monitor Azure Sentinel-related incidents from QRadar.

We have been starting to use Azure Kubernetes Service. However, our developers are afraid of shifting our production environment to the Azure Kubernetes so this whole process can continue. At the end of the day, our main goal is still completely replacing our on-premises sources with serverless architecture. 

We also started to use Azure Firewall and Azure Front Door as our web application firewall solutions. So, we are still replacing our on-prem sources. Azure Sentinel works perfectly in this case because we are using Microsoft resources. We have replaced half of our on-premises with Azure Firewalls. The other half exists in our physical data centers in Istanbul.

The initial setup is getting more complex since we are using two different solutions: One is located on-prem and the other one is Azure Sentinel. This means Azure Sentinel needs to inspect both SIEMs and correlate them. This increased our environment's complexity. So, our end goal is to have one SIEM solution and eliminate QRadar.

The initial setup process takes only one or two weeks. For the Azure-related and Office 365-related log sources, they were enabled for Azure Sentinel using drag and drop, which was easy. However, if you need to get some logs from Azure Sentinel to your on-prem or integrate your on-prem resources with Azure Sentinel, then it gets messy. 

This is still an ongoing process. We are still trying to improve our Azure Sentinel environment right now, but the initial process was so easy.

We had two three guys on our security team do the initial setup, which took one or two weeks. 

We are not seeing cost savings right now, because using Azure Sentinel tools has increased our costs.

Pricing and licensing are okay. On the E5 license, many components exist for this license, e.g., Azure Sentinel and Azure AD.

I am just paying for the log space with Azure Sentinel. It costs us about $2,000 a month. Most of the logs are free. We are only paying money for Azure Firewall logs because email logs or Azure AD logs are free to use for us.

In Turkey, Microsoft is more powerful than other vendors. There are not so many partners who exist for AWS or G Cloud. This is the reason why we have been proceeding with Microsoft.

QRadar rules are easier to create than on the Azure Sentinel. It is possible to create rules with Sentinel, but it is very difficult.

There have been no negative effects on our end users.

I would rate Azure Sentinel as seven out of 10.

Our team uses Microsoft Sentinel to monitor all security incidents. Security analysts working the intake process configure rules that trigger alerts based on specific criteria and route them to the appropriate team based on the event ID. This unified view within Sentinel allows me to investigate each incident, tracing its origin, path, and endpoint. By analyzing the information gathered, I can then determine whether the alert is a true positive or a false positive.

The visibility into threats that Microsoft Sentinel provides is excellent.

Microsoft Sentinel prioritizes threats across our organization, with levels P1, P2, and P3. This helps me determine how to investigate since some alerts, especially P1s, might seem critical at first glance. However, further investigation may reveal non-critical situations, like a P1 triggered by an authorized user's access from an unfamiliar IP or location. Analyzing logs can help identify these scenarios and ensure appropriate responses.

Microsoft Sentinel and Defender seamlessly integrate to provide a unified system for detecting and responding to security threats across our entire environment. This is crucial for meeting compliance standards and informing client communication. By investigating all security events and summarizing key findings in reports, we can not only highlight critical incidents but also demonstrate the steps we're taking to reduce the overall number of high, medium, and low-severity threats for our clients.

I would rate the comprehensiveness of the threat-protection that Microsoft Sentinel provides an eight out of ten.

Once data is ingested, the process begins with reviewing the ticket information. This can then lead us to Sentinel, where we can view logs. The depth of our investigation determines the next step: a login to Defender, which provides the full range of investigation tools to pinpoint the root cause of the incident.

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

I would rate the comprehensiveness of Microsoft Sentinel eight out of ten.

Microsoft Sentinel helps automate routine tasks and the finding of high-value alerts.

Microsoft Sentinel simplifies security management by offering a single, unified XDR dashboard, eliminating the need to switch between and monitor multiple disconnected security tools.

The threat intelligence gives us a proactive advantage by anticipating potential threats, allowing us to prioritize and swiftly address critical incidents before they cause harm.

Microsoft Sentinel has helped save us time.

The detection is in real-time with Microsoft Sentinel. 

While Microsoft Sentinel provides a log of security events, its true power lies in its integration with Microsoft Defender. Defender extends Sentinel's capabilities by allowing for in-depth investigation. Imagine investigating a phishing email: through Defender within Sentinel, we can view the email itself, block the malicious email address and its domain, and even take down its IP address – all within a unified platform.

I would like Microsoft Sentinel to enhance its SOAR capabilities. 

I have been using Microsoft Sentinel for two years.

I would rate the stability of Microsoft Sentinel ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of Microsoft Sentinel ten out of ten.

I evaluated a few other SIEM solutions but I prefer Microsoft Sentinel because it is straightforward and I can also use Defender to investigate.

I would rate Microsoft Sentinel nine out of ten.

While Microsoft Sentinel offers SIEM capabilities for security information and event management, it doesn't fully replace the need for a separate SOAR solution, which specializes in security orchestration, automation, and response.

In addition to Microsoft Sentinel, I've also used IBM Security QRadar, which I believe is a superior solution because it functions as both a SIEM and SOAR, offering a more comprehensive approach to handling complex security processes.

I advise taking the course before using Microsoft Sentinel to have a better understanding of the solution.

I recommend trying Microsoft Sentinel.

Sentinel is used to cover cloud-native customers for security monitoring. It includes UEBA, threat intelligence, behavioral analytics, etcetera. We also use it to automate incidents into tickets.

The solution improved our organization in a few ways. The key one is the cloud layer of integrations. When we were on-premises with SAP monitoring we faced a few issues in the integration of cloud infrastructure logs. Once we moved into the Sentinel Cloud the integration was pretty easy. Monitoring the cloud infrastructure and their respective applications and their cloud cloud-native products became pretty easy in terms of integration with monitored areas.

Also, the cost of infrastructure is no longer an issue.

The detection layer has also been improved with analytics. Plus, it keeps on getting better in Sentinel. Since 2020, I've seen Sentinel has made a lot more changes in feature improvements and performance. They’re fine-tuning detection and analysis layers.

The analytics rules are excellent. It's pretty easy to create them. It’s all about SQL queries that we need to deploy at the back end.

The search of the logs is easy. Before, there were no archival logs. Now, in recent versions, it’s easy to bring back the logs from the archives. We can research and query the archive of logs very easily.

The visibility is great. It gives good alerts. The way an analyst can go and drill down into more details is simple, The ability to threat hunt has been useful.

Sentinel helps us prioritize threats across the enterprise. With it, we have a single pane for monitoring security logs. As an MSP, they just ingest all the logs into the system, and this actually leads to a hierarchy for our integrations. It’s easy to review the logs for auditing purposes.

We use more than one Microsoft security product. Other team members use Intune, Microsoft CASB, and Microsoft Defender as well. It’s easy to integrate everything. You just need to enable the connector in the back end. It takes one minute. These solutions work natively together to deliver coordinated detection responses across our environment. We just integrated the Microsoft Defender logs into Sentinel. It already has the prebuilt use cases in Sentinel, including threat-hunting playbooks, and automation playbooks. It's pretty easy and ready to use out of the box.

Sentinel enables us to ingest data from our entire ecosystem. That's really the high point for us. The coverage needs to be expanded. The threat landscape is getting wider and wider and so we need to monitor each and every ecosystem in our customer organization's endpoints, including the endpoints or applications for systems or on the servers or network level. It needs to be integrated on all levels, whether it’s on-premises or cloud. It is really important to have a single point of security monitoring, to have everything coordinated.

Sentinel enables us to investigate threats and respond holistically from one place. For that analyst team, the Sentinel page is like a single point of investigation layer for them. Whenever an incident is created, they can just come in and get deeper into a particular investigation incident. They are able to get more information, figure out the indicators, and make recommendations to customers or internal teams to help them take action.

Given its built-in UEBA and threat intelligence capabilities, the comprehensiveness of Sentinel's security protection is really nice. The UEBA can be integrated with only the AD logs. And, since they need to get integrated with the networks and the VPN layers as well, it’s useful to have comprehensive security. It can be integrated into other Microsoft security products as well.

Sentinel pricing is good. The customer doesn't want to worry about the enterprise infrastructure cost in the system. They worry about the enterprise cost and the management, and operation, CAPEX, et cetera. However, in general, the customer simply needs to worry only about the usage, for example, how much data is getting sent into the system. We can still refine the data ingestion layer as well and decide what needs to be monitored and whatnot. That way, we can pay only for what we are monitoring.

Our Microsoft security solution helps automate routine tasks and help automate the finding of high-value alerts. By leveraging Sentinel's automation playbook, we have automated the integrations and triage as well. This has simplified the initial investigation triage, to the point where we do not need to do any initial investigations. It will directly go on into layer two or it directly goes to the customer status.

Our Microsoft security solution helped eliminate having to look at multiple dashboards and gave us one XDR dashboard. The dashboard is pretty cool. We now have a single pane of glass. A lot of customization needs to be done, however, there are predefined dashboards and a content hub. We still leverage those dashboards to get the single view into multiple days, including the log volumes or types of security monitoring or in the operation monitoring system.

Sentinel saves us time. Even just the deployment, it only takes ten minutes for the could. When you have on-premises tasks that are manual, it can take hours or a day to deploy the entire setup. Integrating the log sources used also takes time. By enabling out-of-the-box tools, we can save a lot of time here and there. Also, once you leverage automation, by simply leveraging logic apps in a local kind of environment, you don’t need to know much coding. You just need knowledge of logic at the back end.

The solution has saved us money. While I’m not sure of the exact commercial price, it’s likely saved about 20% to 30%.

The solution decreased our time to detect and your time to respond. For time to detect, by leveraging analytic rules, we’ve been able to cut down on time. Everything is happening within minutes. We can begin remediation quickly instead of in hours.

The UEBA part needs improvement. They need to bring other log sources to UEBA. 

The reporting could be more structured. There are no reporting modules or anything. It's only the dashboard. Therefore, when a customer requests a report, you need to manually pull the dashboard and send it to the customer for the reporting. However, if there was a report or template there, it would be easier to schedule and send the weekly reports or monthly executive reports.

The log ingestion could be improved on the connector layer.

I've been using the solution since November of 2020. 

The solution is stable. We had some issues with an automation component. There might have been outages on the back end, however, it's mostly fine.

We have about 25 people using the solution in our organization, including analysts. 

You only need to pay for what you are ingesting and monitoring. It scales well. There are no issues with it. 

Support is okay. We don't have many issues on the platform layers. We might reach out to support for integration questions. Largely, the engineering team would handle support cases. 

Neutral

We do use other solutions. We added this solution as we needed to support cloud-native customers. 

We also use LogRhythm among other solutions.

Each solution has its own pros and cons. There isn't a direct contrast to each. Some have better reporting. However, Sentinel has very good analytical rules and automation. LogRhythm, however, requires more backend work. 

The deployment of the Microsoft bundle is pretty easy. It's fast and saves time. In ten minutes, we can deploy Sentinel to the customer and start monitoring data with the existing rules. You'll have dashboards in thirty minutes. One person can do the deployment. To manage the solution, one can manage the injections, and one can manage the detection layers.

The solution does not require any maintenance. You just have to make sure it's up to date.

We're using it in the automotive and energy industries. 

When we calculated the pricing, we thought it was 10% to 20% less, however, it depends on how much data is being collected. It's not overly expensive. It's fairly priced. 

Security vendors are chosen based on use cases. Those gaps are met by the respective solution. The benefit of a single vendor is that everything is on a single-layer stack. It helps you see everything in one single pane. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

We are a Microsoft partner, an MSP. 

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.

Neutral

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.